Vice Provost Andersen met with 30 faculty on February 4, 1994 to plan the orientation program and, in particular, to strengthen the academic component. The major goal is to emphasize to new students that they are responsible for their academic success. The program is to highlight the love of learning, to develop an appreciation of diversity as respect for others and an opportunity to learn about others, and to foster an identification with this University.
Faculty will be involved deeply with this program on Monday morning. Students will go to their departments (the name for ASU students is to be reconsidered) where, in addition to the usual informational talks, students will be given a demonstration lecture in which they will take notes. In the following workshop on study skills they will be shown an effective set of notes. Departments are encouraged to expand on this suggestion.
Vice Provost Andersen closed by thanking the faculty participants at the February 4th meeting for their ideas.
Douglas Tuttle described the response by the University community to the requirement of the Clean Air Act of 1990 mandating a 25 percent reduction in automobile commuting by employees of all large organizations in order to reduce the ground level ozone in northern New Castle County. Employees are defined as faculty, staff, and graduate students on contracts; students not on contract are excluded from the classification. A survey of University employees conducted in September showed that there are 1.2 persons per car during the commuting periods of the day. This number must be increased to 1.5 to comply with the law. This figure can be achieved by any combination of increases in car pooling, use of public transportation, walking, bicycling, telecommuting and flex time. A second survey is in progress to find effective ways to motivate the community to participate in these corrective measures. Faculty are encouraged to send comments and suggestions to Douglas Tuttle.
President Scott shared information on the Provost search. Dean Daniel Rich, Chair of the Search Committee, will present a report at the March meeting. The search is on schedule, and currently a number of semi-finalists are being interviewed off-campus. These interviews will be completed by the end of February, and then the on-campus interviews of the finalists will begin.
The Senate has been invited to hold extraordinary meetings for each of the finalists. These meetings will be open to the entire faculty. The candidate will have an opportunity to give a brief opening statement followed by responses to a set of questions presented to all candidates, and, finally, to answer questions from the floor. Suggestions for the fixed questions are welcome.
The following Announcements for Challenge were then accepted as presented:
President Scott emphasized that Items A and B were intended to be complementary. Item A addresses listing of courses in transcripts, registration booklets and catalogs, while Item B concerns the description of programs in University publications. Major John Cooper and Colonel Richard Martel reviewed the resolutions and concurred with them as written.
Senator Flynn asked how the resolution differed from the similar resolution of the Fall. President Scott responded that the current resolution is narrowly focused whereas the former was broadly focused. Senator Bellamy questioned how the resolution applied to the handicapped and was answered by noting handicapped status is a separate issue for which the University has recently hired a specialist. Senator Grubb offered an amendment (seconded by Senator Klaff) to be added at the end of the first "Resolved:" ". . . except where allowed by Federal law." After a brief discussion the amendment was defeated. The following resolution was then adopted:
The University of Delaware is committed to assuring equal opportunity to all persons and does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, gender, religion, ancestry, national origin, sexual orientation, veteran status, age, or disability in its educational programs, activities, admissions or employment practices.
Senator Pizzuto asked how the resolution is to be carried out. He was informed that the resolution is aimed at those who write program descriptions for University publications, and enforcement is to be collegial. Senator Bellamy noted that the resolution only requires that program descriptions ". . . clearly state the existence of restrictions," and does not require that these restrictions be spelled out. Dean Murray stated that the word "admission" in the third Whereas of the resolution creates an ambiguity. After a brief discussion, this word was struck by a vote.
Senator Martuza asked if the resolution applied to descriptions of scholarships. President Scott replied that the resolution pertained to program descriptions and that scholarship descriptions should be considered in a separate resolution. Following is the amended resolution as passed:
The University of Delaware is committed to assuring equal opportunity to all persons and does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, gender, religion, ancestry, national origin, sexual orientation, veteran status, age, or disability in its educational programs, activities, admissions or employment practices.
This resolution was introduced to extend the minimum grade requirement of the College of Arts and Science to the University. Senator Boncelet expressed his opposition to the resolution because D is considered a passing grade. Discussion established that very few students have graduated from the University with D grades in English 110. Senator Bonner questioned the wisdom of requiring the College of Business and Economics to impose another requirement for graduation. Senator Varnes, an instructor of ENGL 110, responded that the C- standard means, ". . . you can kind of tell what the speaker is trying to say." Senators Hobbie and Daniels questioned if the C- standard should apply to all courses. The question was called by a voice vote and the following resolution was approved:
[The original resolution was amended by the Executive Committee in response to Interim Provost Murray's observation that the titles used have been changed. The corrected resolution was presented to the Senate on a viewgraph.]
Frank Dilley, Chairperson of the Committee on Committees and Nominations, and President Scott noted that the Director of the Bookstore supported the resolution. The following amended resolution was approved:
This committee will advise the Senate on policies, practices, and needs for educational resource facilities and computer facilities. It will further represent the faculty to the Vice President for Information Technologies, the Director of Instructional Technologies Center, the Director of the Library, and the Director of the University Bookstore.
The Committee on Instructional Computing and Research Support Services shall consist of one faculty member from each of the colleges of the University, one of whom shall be appointed as chairperson; an undergraduate student; a graduate student; a designee of the Director of the Library; a designee of the Vice President for Information Technologies; a designee of the Director of Instructional Technologies Center; and a designee of the Director of the University Bookstore.
This item was drafted by the Committee on Faculty Welfare and Privileges and reviewed by the Committee on Committees and Nominations. It was presented to the Senate because the resolution makes a substantial addition to the Procedures of the Committee on Faculty Welfare and Privileges.
Harrison Hall, Chairperson of the Committee on Faculty Welfare and Privileges explained that the existing Procedures were rewritten to follow the form of the Procedures previously passed by the Senate and modified to include the policies of the Faculty Handbook which deal specifically with terminations. Frank Dilley added that there are two important distinctions. In a termination hearing, the faculty member has the right to be represented by an attorney, a right which does not apply to a complaint. Further, in a termination hearing the attorney may lead the discussion, whereas in a complaint the advisor may not participate in the discussion.
Senator Bellamy questioned the standard of proof and asked why "beyond a reasonable doubt" was changed to "clear and convincing evidence." Harrison Hall responded that "beyond a reasonable doubt" was once in a draft of the procedures but never was adopted. The "beyond a reasonable doubt" is used in criminal cases and the "clear and convincing evidence" applies in civil cases. A review of termination procedures of other universities established that civil standard of proof are used. Chairperson Hall added that the procedures in this resolution use the more stringent of the two civil standards.
Frank Murray asked if the termination procedures apply to professional staff with secondary faculty appointments. Chairperson Hall responded that termination of faculty applies only to three grounds: moral turpitude, incompetence, and gross negligence. Individuals with faculty status are entitled to a hearing. Dean Murray also asked for clarification of C.1.a., "Written Letter of Intent to Terminate," which states that the initiator sends the termination letter to the respondent and to the Committee on Faculty Welfare and Privileges. He also asked what happens if the respondent doesn't wish the Committee to know of the intent to terminate. Chairperson Hall answered that the Committee treats termination and complaints with confidentiality and that no action would be taken by the Committee until requested by the respondent of the letter of intent to terminate.
The following resolution then was passed:
Respectfully submitted,
Jon Olson
Secretary
University Faculty Senate
JO/rg
TA/rg
Attachments: Committee Activities Report
