Texas Tech University
The Faculty Senate
October 3, 1980
TO:
Members of the Faculty Senate
FROM:
Roland E. Smi h, President
SUBJECT:
Agenda for meeting #26, October 8, 1980
The Faculty S nate will meet on Wednesday, October 8, 1980 at 3:30 p.m.
in the Senate Room o the University Center. The agenda is as follows:
I.
Minutes of the S ptember 10, 1980 meeting
II.
Annual Report
III.
Report of the
IV.
V.
Recommended chan e in Senate Bylaws - Stewart
Proposed revisi n of the Te ure Policy - Schoen
VII.
Report on deve opments con erning the Athletic Council - Smith
VIII.
X.
enure and Privilege Committee - Stewart
Resolution rega ding certain university committees - Agenda Committe
VI.
IX.
the Faculty Senate, 1979-1980
Report on Aus in meeting
Smith
Other Business
Announcements
A. Selectedi
ms from minntes of Academic Council Meetings
e tember 9 1 80
1.
A discussi
was distri
all appoin
clearly de
cussion of
made for i
n draft regarding clarification of appointment desig
uted and discussed. Dr. Cavazos indicated his conce
ees be treated fairly and that appointments and cont
ignate the condition of agreements. There was gener
the types and nature of temporary appointments which
structional positions.
ations
n that
acts
1 dismight be
2.
Dr. Hardwi
He noted t
useful in
person's a
considerat
k discussed peer evaluation for tenure and promotion
e need for careful and fair appraisal with documenta
he review process. He also noted the importance of
nual evaluation and that annual evaluation's relatio
on for tenute and promotion.
purposes.
ion to be
he chairship to
LubbOck, Texas 794091(806) 742-3656
Page 2.
Agenda, Faculty Sena:e Meeting # 6
October 8, 1980
Announcements continued 3. Council menbers were a$ked to obtain the appropriate forms for utside
employment from any faculty who are engaged in, or who plan to be engaged
in consulting or other outside employment as defined by board p olicy
during the coming academic year.
4. There was brief discussion of the Academic Information System
d its use
for the coming year. It was noted that the Information System uould again
be used to look at a variety of factors including teaching wor _oads,
class size, schedule, and cost effectiveness, as well as research and
productivity measures. As soon as the information can be deve oped for
this semester deans will be asked to work with their chairpers ns and
other representatives to review and determine better allocatio s of
resources within the collegiate units.
5. Dr. Ramsey mentioned the Governor's Office request for reducti -a of state
employees and the need for balancing faculty assignments and w -Aloads as
changes are considered in response to the Governor's program.
6.
A propose] for a ledership development program was announced. rhe
Instituticn has made a proposal to the Governor's office for fLads to
assist in leadership development activities on campus for the next three
years.
7.
Dr. Jones discussed the possibility of some salary improvement funds to be
available from indirect cost return and investment interests increases
during the year. He noted that a distribution system is needed and indicated
that a prLmary concern was for improved support of highly productive faculty,
particularly in the research area since this represents a part of the source
of funds.
8. Dr. Hardw_ck briefly described a communication from the Commis
Higher Edlcation regatding classifications of institutions wit
He indica:ed that the President had objected strongly to any s
would be letrimental to Texas Tech's position as a major multi
universit y within the state.
ioner of
in the state.
stem which
purpose
B. Correspondence
The following correspOndence has been sent from the Senate Office since
that which was reported at the last Senate meeting.
I. A second letter to Lonise Luchsinger, Clarence Bell, Martin Gu dersen,
David Fina, and Michael White, regarding their absence from th Senate.
2. Dan Bensoa, accepting his resignation from the Special Hearing Panel for
the Tenure and Privilege Committee.
Page 3.
Agenda, Faculty Senate Meeting # 6
October 8, 1980
Correspondence tontinted
3.
Murl A. Larkin cDnfirming hip appointment as a member of the Faculty
standing committee, Faculty Status-and Welfare.
4.
Paul Hanna, info:ming him of his election by the Faculty Senate to se ve on
the Special Hearing Panel for the Tenure and Privilege Committtee.
5.
Stephen B. Thomas, accepting his resignation from the ad hoc Committe
Institutional Resource Date Base.
6.
Michael C. Stouna, accepting his resignation from the Faculty Senate.
7.
Charles Hardwick, regarding Senate confirmed nominations to fill vaca cies
on the Library Committee and on the Admissions and Registration Commi tee.
8.
J. Knox Jones, regarding appointments to the Academic Publications Co
9.
Lauro F. Cavazos President, forwarding the resolution concerning the Athletic
Council which the Senate approved at its September meeting.
enate
on
ittee.
10.
William A. Stewa=t, Chairperson, Tenure & Privilege Committee, reques ing a
report to the Senate from that committee on the status of its recomme ations
to the President of the Univarsity concerning temporary faculty posit ns, etc.
11.
Charles Hardwick
12.
Margaret Wilson, to serve as convenor of the Faculty Senate standing Dmmittee,
Budget Study Committee, and oharging that committee with the investig ion of
the financial situation of the library.
13.
Ernest W. Sullivan, Department of English, confirming his appointment as
Parliamentarian of the Faculty Senate for the remainder of the 1980-8 academic
year.
14.
William A. Stewalt, Chairperson, Tenure & Privilege Committee, regard ag the
Senate's election of Murl Larkin, School of Law, to the Special Heari ; Panel
of the Tenure & Privilege CoMmittee.
15.
Charles Hardwick, regarding appointments to fill vacancies on the Lib s.ry
Committee.
16.
J. William Davis, thanking him for his attendance at the September Fa
meeting and for lis work as member of the ad hoc Committee to Investi
Compliance of Texas Tech University with Southwest Athletic Conferenc
forwarding the resolution regarding large lecture h
ls.
6
Ilty Senate
te
Rules.
Agenda item VI.
8 If a faculty member on probationary appointment alleges that
a dec sion not to reappoint him is caused by considerati is violative
Present text of TTU
Tenure Policy, Par
Section 8
PROPOSED
1
2
IV,
of ac. demic freedom, his allegations shall be given preli linary consi der tion by a faculty committee. If the committee conclud s that there
is pr bable cause for the faculty member's allegation, the natter shall
be h -ird in accordance with the procedures outlined in Section VI,.
excep that the faculty member shall be responsible for stating the
grow ds on which he bases his allegations and the burden cf proof will
rest u on him.
VISION OF T
8. If a p obationary
TENURE POLICY, PART IV, SECTION
acuity member believes that a decision to
deny reappointm nt
3
(a) was m de for reas ns violating academic freedom;
4
(b) was m de without
5
6
8
equate consideration of professional
performance;
(c) was
de after no
ompliance with prescribed procedures;
(d) was b sed upon fa tors lacking a substantial relationship t)
8
9
professional fi ness or per
(0)
was b sed upon a
rmance; or
riterion not listed among the prescribed
10
evaluative crit ria for rea
ointment or admission to tenure, the facalty
11
member may pres nt these al
gations, which shall include the specifi)
12
grounds support ng them, in
13
Standing Commit
14
Committee shall give prel
15
complaint. If
he Committe
concludes that there is probable cause fn.
16
the complaint,
he matter s
11 be heard in accordance with the procelures
17
outlined in Sec ion VI, exc pt that the faculty member shall be responsible
18
for stating
19
bear the burden of proof.
the
e on Tenur
grounds upo
ting to the chairperson of the University
and Privilege. The elected members of Vie
ary consideration to the faculty meMberls
which the allegations are based and shall
ittee find probable cause if nonreappointment
20
In no case shall the C
21
was for reasons of bona Lid
22
duly considered and authori ed deletion of an academic program or part
23
thereof.
[Se
financial exigency or in consequence of a
next page for Comments on the Proposed Revision]
Agenda item VI:
Comments
The University nure and Pr
established by the Beard of Regen
important functions: (1) to mak
and (2) to decide if there is "pr
ulty member has been enied reapp
The proposed re
Under the present te
the Committee of prob
activates a Special
adversary proceeding
administration is th
Special Hearing Commi
Tenure Policy, Part V
vilege Committee (hereinafter "the Comm tee") is
s in the TTU Tenure Policy. The Committ e has two
recommendations pertaining to the tenu policy,
bable cause" that a complaining probatio ary facintment for reasons violating academic f eedom.
sion relate to the Committee's "probable cause" fun
of the TTU Tenure Policy, Part IV, Section 8, a fin
ble cause tlat a violation of academic freedom has o
aring Commi tee to hear the faculty member's complai
herein the aculty member is the petitioner and the
respondent. The findings and recommendations, if an
tee are pre ented to the Board of Regents for action
, 1976-77 F culty Handbook, pp. 47-48.)
tion.
ing by
curred
t in an
niversity
, of the
(TTU
The proposed rev sion substa daily increases the specific grounds up
the Committee might f nd probable cause that a violation has occurred. Au
to find probable caus should not be confused with the exercise of that au
The Committee is neut al. It is either advocate nor adversary of the fac
ber or the University administrat on.
n which
hority
hority.
lty mem-
Expansion of the probable ca se grounds beyond "academic freedom" is
by the persistent pro lems encoun ered in defining the precise meaning and
"academic freedom" an the need t provide specific additional safeguards
bationary faculty mem ers who are denied tenure or reappointment. These p
supplementary proscri tions--some procedural, some substantive--are consis
the proper goals and dministrati n of the tenure policy and consistent as
a fair personnel poll y.
equired
scope of
Or prooposed
ent with
ell with
Tenure should no be awarded to faculty members whose qualifications
d professional performance are deficie t. Awarding tenure to unqualified perso s is
encontrary to the best nterests of the faculty and the University and there
dangers the tenure sy tem itself. This proposed revision does not guarant
tenure
or reappointment for nqualified ersons. The revision merely requires th t decisions to award or den tenure, to reappoint or terminate, be made in accor nce
with prescribed proce ures, be ma .e after consideration of relevant factor
and
be made for legitimat reasons.
The proposed rev sion also i chides less significant changes to the p
text of Part IV, Sect on 8. In a cordance with past practice and custom,
vision specifically ii entifies th "faculty committee" as the University S
Committee on Tenure aid Privilege. The revision, again reflecting past pr
and custom, states th t the "prob ble cause" complaint shall be considered
elected members of th Committee. Although the President and Vice Preside
Academic Affairs are x officio members of the Committee, these officers i
years have not partic pated in th probable cause proceedings of the Commi
sent
e rending
tice
y the
for
past
ee.
The final paragr ph of the p oposed revision makes explicit what has ways
been implicit.
Agenda item IV
RESOLUTI N REGARDING NOMINEES TO
CERTAIN UNIVERSITY COMMITTEES
WHEREASt e"Directory of Standing Councils and Committees
1980-81" specifies t at four committees (Biosafety Committee,
Protectio of Human S bjects Committee, Radiation and Laser
Safety Co ittee, and Warm-Blooded Animal Committee) are
"special ommittees," and "not standing committees of the
Universit ; and
WHEREAS A ticle V, Se tion 4 of the Constitution of the Faculty
Senate of Texas Tech niversity (approved and adopted by the Faculty
Council, niversity P esident, and the Board of Regents)
states:
"The
comp
of T
Medi
comm
memb
Univ
(but
from
by t
spec
Sena
President o
sition of a
xas Tech Un
me, and th
ttees or co
rs are to b
rsity facul
not ad hoc)
a list of n
e Faculty S
fy the numb
e for each
the University may establish and define
hoc or standing committees or councils
versity, Texas Tech University School of
Museum of Texas Tech University, or joirt
ncils of the above, and may determine if
elected or appointed. Texas Tech
y members appointed to these standing
committees or councils shall be selected
minees for each committee or council provided
nate. The President of the University may
r of nominations to be supplied by the Faculty
uch committee or council position.
The osition of he chairperson of the Athletic Council
of t e Universit shall not be open to nomination by the
Facu ty Senate."
BE IT RES
that the
(named ab
in the fo
and stati
when, in
matter of
We reques
LVED that t e Faculty Senate reminds the administratLon
esponsibili y for nomination to the four committees
ve) resides with the Faculty Senate and has been violated
lowing mann r: by calling them "special" committees
g that they "are not standing committees of the University,"
act, they a e; and by publishing them in the directory "as a
information.
that the c
ittees be restored to their former statas.
Agenda item V.,
INTRODUCTION
Proposal to amend he bylaws:
In accordance
attached to the ag
thirds affirmative
de facto vacancies
to be held for tho
with Sectio 10 of the bylaws, this proposition is
nda for act on at the October 8 meeting. A twovote will m ke it effective immediately and permit
to be fille during the same elections which are
e which hay been vacated by resignation.
RECOMMENDATION
Amend Section
absence of more th
seat vacant when s
conditions which m
Bill Stewart
10/3/80
8 by adding
n five cons
ch an antic
y be reason
paragraph 5, as follows: An anticipated
ctive months shall be cause to declare a
pation is supported by knowledge of the
bly expected to cause the absence.