Minutes
Faculty Senate Meeting #27
November 12, 1980
The Faculty Senate met on Wednesd , November 12, 1980, at 3:30 p.m. in the Senate
Room of the University CEnter with Ro and Smith, president, presiding. Senato Ts present
were Bacon, Blaisdell, Clements, Coc an, Collins, Dale, Denham, Dixon, Filgo, Harris,
Higdon, Hill, Horridge, Jebsen, Keho, Kellogg, Kimmel, Lee, McDonald, McPherso 1, Masten,
Mogan, Nelson, Newcomb, Cwens, Rude, Sanders, Schoen, Stewart, Tan, Troub, Vol z, Williams,
Wilson, and Wood. Anderson, Cepica, Gipson, McGuire, and Smith were absent be muse of
other university business. Malloy, orris and Shine were also absent.
The guests were E. L. Short, State Senator; Len Ainsworth, Interim Vice Pre
for Academic Affairs; Hurl Larkin, C irperson of the Faculty Status & Welfare
Gary Elbow, Department of Geography; ruce Kemp, Internal Vice President, Stuc
Association; Ruthanne Brcckway, Aval che Journal; Duncan McDowell, University
& Publications; Ernest W. Sullivan, P arliamentarian; and Kippie Hopper, Laurie
and Max Faulkner, University Daily.
sident
Committee;
nt
News
Platt
SUMMARY OF BUSINESS CONDLCTED
The Faculty Senate:
Approved the minutes of the Octtober 8, 1980 meeting,
Informally discussed matters of interest with State Senator E. L. Short
Heard a report frcm the Facultfr Status & Welfare Committee,
Approved a proposEd revision of TTU Tenure Policy, Part IV, Section 8,
Discussed the "Guidelines on Opecial Merit Salary Increases Based
on Research Performance,"
6. Heard seven annourcements, and
7. Referred one mattEr to the Tenure & Privilege Committee.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
I. MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 8, 1980 MEETING
Wilson moved acceptance of the minutes as written and distributed. The mot ion
carried.
II. STATE SENATOR E. L.
SHORT
Smith introduced State Senator E. L. Short and suspended the rules to allow for
informal discussion. Serator Short cutlined several topics for discussion and responded
to questions and comments. Senator hort said he supported the Coordinating B Dard's
recommendations for salary increases, mentioned tenure policy, and suggested t hat
individuals contact him cirectly on natters of concern.
Sanders criticized Governor Cleme
programs. Short responded that he p
that any new information, new reason
expressed particular interest in the
money lost through veto of state lin
ts's veto of the beef cattle and water r sources
ans to talk with the Governor about some items and
, or new statistics would be helpful to h im. He
School of Nursing and concern over the f eral
items.
Minutes
Faculty Senate Meeting C 7
November 12, 1980
Page 2.
Cochran mentioned the necessity fo full funding and funding at higher leveLs for
the Library. Short said the Legislat 've Budget Board was completing budgets aad that
upgrading of funding leve ls had proba ly been presented.
Newcomb described prat lems in the distribution of salary appropriations, qt.astioning
if legislative intentions are being f llowed when interpretation is left to administrators.
Particularly, Newcomb poi nted out tha administrators received 12% increases cne year
when faculty received 3-4 %. Elbow de cribed problems in interpreting the dire:ted
5.1% increase for faculty making less than $15,000 one year when administrator 3 considered
annualizing nine month To tes to twelv month rates. Short said he needed numbars,
support from other areas of the state, or other materials with which to work cn matters
such as this.
Ainsworth asked about the rumored cost-of-living increase. Short said he had no
information concerning it at present. The step system used by public teachers and
state employees was ment' ned by sevefal senators who also pointed out that stsp raises
do not recognize differen t market valUes in various disciplines, hence creating morale
problems.
Responding to Stewart' s question c ncerning the Coordinating Board's policy on new
programs, Short pointed o ut that the oard's makeup is changing and that a Lubbockite
may soon be appointed to the Board.
e lamented the current difficulties invoLved in
approval of and funding f ar new const uction following the repeal of the 10% ad valorem
tax. He endorsed in pri iple a dedifated fund.
III.
SENATE GUESTS
Following the discussi an with Senator Short, Smith introduced the guests of the Senate.
IV.
REPORT OF TEE FACULT T STATUS & WELFARE COMMITTEE
Larkin, referring to t ae report of
with the meeting agenda, 3aid the Co
Committee detail the proc adures to be
TTU Tenure Policy. The C mmittee rec
the Faculty Status & Welfare Committee cLrculated
ittee had considered Smith's request that the
followed in implementing the proposed c - nges to
mmended:
a. That the Faculty S mate as a bOdy consider and approve the proposed
revision of University policy, and forwardcopies of its action thereon
to the University admi listration a*d faculty for information.
b. That the Faculty S mate therea ter call a full faculty meeting at which
the full faculty will lave an oppo tunity to consider and act upon the
proposed revision.
c. That the Faculty S mate therea ter officially submit the action of the
full faculty to the Pr asident of t e University for his presentation to the
Board of Regents.
Minutes
Faculty Senate Meeting #7
November 12, 1980
Page 3.
The proposed revision of TTU Tenure Pplicy, Part IV, Section 8 reads:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
8. If a probe. ionary faculty member believes that a decision to
deny reappointmen
(a) was made f • r reasons violating academic freedom;
(b) was made w thout adequate consideration of professional
performance;
(c) was made a ter significent noncompliance with prescribed
procedures;
(d) was based pon factors 'lacking a substantial relationship to
professional fitn ss or perfor nce; or
(e) was based pon a criterion not listed among the prescribed
evaluative criter a for reappointment or admission to tenure,
the faculty membe may present these allegations, which shall include c e
specific grounds upporting t em, in writing to the chairperson of the
University Standi g Committee n Tenure and Privilege. The elected me ers
of the Committee hall give preliminary consideration to the faculty
member's complain . If the Conmittee concludes that there is probable
cause for the corn laint, the natter shall be heard in accordance with c e
procedures outlin d in Sectior VI, except that the faculty member shal.
be responsible fo stating th grounds upon which the allegations are
based and shall b ar the burdn of proof.
In no case sha 1 the Committee find probable cause if nonreappoinM, t
was for reasons o bona fide financial exigency or in consequence of a
duly considered a d authorizec deletion of an academic program or part
thereof.
Kimmel moved acceptan e of the replort and approval of its recommendations.
Blaisdell asked if pr posed revis ons (h-e) redefined academic freedom and was
assured by Larkin and ot ers that it s (b-e) were independent of item (a) whfich
concerns academic freedo . Schoen a d Newcomb further clarified the response.
Hill and Newcomb disc ssed the revision'$ relationship with the 1940 AAUP statement
concerning tenure, Hill rguing that it went beyond the 1940 statement, Newcorb maintaining
that it did not. Newcom said the revision is actually more in accord with current
AAUP policy.
Questions being raise about the se of the phrase "full faculty" in the Committee
recommendations, Newcomb moved amend ng Committee recommendations b and c to :ead:
b. That the Faculty enate there fter call a full faculty meeting at whic
the voting faculty wi 1 have an o portunity to consider and act upon the
proposed revision.
c. That the Faculty enate thereafter officially submit the action of the
voting faculty to the President of the University for his presentation to he
Board of Regents.
Minutes
Faculty Senate Meeting #27
November 12, 1980
Page 4.
The amendment carried.
Harris asked if the meeting could 1)e called in conjunction with the Presidcat's
semi-annual talk in order to assure f aculty attendance. Smith said such woule. not
be appropriate since the Faculty Sena te does not share the same relationship with the
President as the old Factlty Council. Several senators said the meeting date ahould
be selected carefully to insure maximum attendance and that the meeting shoulE be held
independent of any other function.
Keho asked if the proposed revisioi had any relationship to rumored tenure luotas.
Newcomb and Schoen said there was no elationship. Newcomb further added that tenure
quotas would be an amendment to tenur policy on the part of the administraticn.
Stewart said quotas would violate exiting policy. Hill said the proposed revisions
did not apply to people coming up forl tenure, and several senators pointed out that they
clearly did deal with the tenure deciSion.
The proposed revision of the TTU Tenure Policy was approved, with two votes being
cast against the revisions.
Newcomb moved that the Agenda Comm ittee of the Faculty Senate select the da:e and
make arrangements for the full faculty meeting. The motion carried.
V. GUIDELINES ON SPECIAL MERIT SALARI INCREASES BASED ON RESEARCH PERFORMANCE
Smith referred to the "Guidelines On Special Merit Salary Increases Based cra
Research Performance" and Dean Lawrenbe Graves's October 24, 1980 memorandum, "Research
Merit Salary Raises."
GUIDELINES ON SPECIAL MERIT
SALARY INCREASES BASED ON RESEARCH PERFORMANCE
Funds released by research appoint
be used to provide for one-time merit
beginning on January 1, 1981. These
scholarly research and productivity;
record of research but who has made c
through outstanding teaching or in ot
may be recommended.
ents and other available University rescarces will
increases for approximately 100 faculty members,
erit awards are to be based on outstanding
n rare instances, a faculty member who has a modest
early meritorious contributions to the University
er ways appropriate to the institution's mission
Allocations have been made to each college, based 50% on professional head zount and
50% on performance in spcnsored resea ch. Merit increases may range from $11C) to $1200
with an average of $1100. These will be added to the 1980-81 base salary rate, but payment
faculty member appointed for nine months will be
will be prorated for the year (thus,
paid 5/9 of the increase this academi year).
Recommendations for recipients of wards should be made by the dean of each college,
after consultation with appropriate d partmental chairpersons or coordinators and the
associate dean/coordinatcr for researlch. Administrative personnel (chairpersoas, assistant
Minutes
Faculty Senate Meeting #7
November 12, 1980
Page 5.
and associate deans, etc.
performance. It is expe
particular merit program
statement of approximate
and Graduate Studies and
) may be eligible for the award on the basis of rese
ted that only tenured personnel will participate in
Each recomMendation should be accompanied by a sup
y 100 words hnd will be reviewed in the offices of R
cademic Aff4irs.
rch
lis
Drting
search
Certain departments h
programs. In recognitio
initiative, some awards
basis of research perfor
those departments should
accompanying document (t
should be clearly explai
e worked daigently in developing their sponsored r
of these efOrts and as an encouragement to departm
re strongly huggested for those departments qualifyi
nce. Except in unusual circumstances, faculty memb
receive at least the number of awards indicated on t
ey may, of cOurse, receive more than that number).
ed.
3earch
ltal
on the
cs in
While criteria for ju
appropriately vary from
evaluations:
1. Conduct of
2. Publicatio
3. Developmen
4. Subjective
5. National r
6. Supervisio
student resear
ging the quality and quantity of research accomplishM_ant will
cademic area to area, the following should be conside:ed in
a
Kceptions
sponsored projects.
in refereed journals and other media of recognized E:ature.
and submission of good grant/contract proposals.
udgment of peers and supervisor(s).
* utation in research.
of outstanding theses/dissertations and development of
ers.
I
It is imperative that each award g to a recipient whose record of accomplithment
clearly is worthy of rec nition. To do otherwise undermines the objectives c: this
special incentives progr
Recommendations are d e no later than November 15 in the Office of Academic Affairs.
Changes of status should ot be initihted until the review process has been ccmpleted.
RES EAR H MERIT SALARY RAISES
The University has au orized appr
outs tandin
averaging $1,100 each, f
years. It is hoped that these awards
The Arts and Sciences Co lege has 42
increase to be paid this ear beginni
ximately 100 permanent salary increases,
scholarly research and productivity in -recent
will continue at regular intervals in tha future.
esearch merit raises available, with 5/9 of the
g January 1, 1981.
Criteria for awarding research mer t raises include grants received, proposals
written, theses/disserta ions directe and the scholarly reputation of an individual
among peers in his disci line as evid nced by refereed publications or other appropriate
creative activities.
Minutes
Faculty Senate Meeting # 7
November 12, 1980
Page 6.
To select recipients f research
nit raises in our college, the Following
procedure will be follow d. Each cha 'rperson, after appropriate consultation' gith
his faculty, may nominat as many of is tenured faculty as he feels are quali :ied,
including himself. Each nomination s ould be accompanied by a supporting stat ament
of approximately 100 won s. Rank you nominations in priority order and retur a them
to this office by Monday, November 10 h.
in
All nominations will e reviewed
this office. After any necessary consu Ltation
with you, names of the 4 selected renipients will be forwarded for further re iew by
the Office of Academic A fairs and the Office of Research and Graduate Studies
Smith said the facult was interesIted in knowing if there had been faculty
in the development of th guidelines, if the raises would become part of the s
base, if other factors t n attraction of research money were being considered
why untenured faculty we e excluded. Lengthy discussion followed, but no moti
resolutions were offered
1
input
alary
, and
mis or
In response to questi s concerning inequities and allocations among the va 'ious
colleges, Vice President insworth sad that faculty input had come, some in t 'le form
culty, that each department should have operative cr iteria
of the loss of research
ing
merit, tbat there needed to be incentives for res. aarch,
for establishing and jud
60
me
part
of he salary base, that it was important tc
that the raises could be
than
resear
h, that some deans had included untenurE faculty,
recognize other qualitie
equity
for
hose
not paid from salary funds. He stt assed
and that there was some
St
in
recog
izing
research and in providing incentiv as and
President Cavazos's inte
Is
involved
h
d
come
from funds generated by indirect 2osts and
explained that the $63,0
from interest on investm z ts. The plan itself grew from discussions involving the
President, the Vice Pres dents for Academic Affairs and Research, and the Dear.
Volz called the polic another exa ple of "quirky interpretation" at the de lns'
level. Wilson objected I • research b ing given the highest priority. Tan anE Dixon
questioned the tenured-u enured divi ion. Cochran said a more regular policy was
needed to avoid the ad h c nature of his one, and Volz asked why current fund 3 could
til formula ion of the next budget. Sullivan asked if the
not have been set aside
•
Stewart ob ected to the time-frame of the policy; a ad Cochran
program will be continue
ould sugges a regular basis for the policy and for aculty
said the Faculty Senate
input in developing such • olicies. S veral senators hoped that the policy woL Ld go
more smoothly than last ear's increa es. Lee said incentives could be proviE ad in
other ways, and Collins, expressing a azement over the effect of the money on future
budgets, said the policy sent a clear message concerning research to the facul ty,
le gan said the poor morale created would b a more
especially to the younge faculty.
costly than the benefits gained from he money, and several senators, includin g Owens,
Hill, and Bacon, wondere if manageme t by objective had been spelled out, if
Minutes
Faculty Senate Meeting #7
November 12, 1980
Page 7.
overall merit could be m re effective y recognized, and if the funds would actlally
provide the desired ince tives. Ains orth responded to questions throughout tae
discussion, mainly to ex end or explain his original points.
VI. OTHER BUSINESS
Smith said that in re ponse to the Senate's resolution pursuant to the finaacial
problems of the Library, the President and the Academic Vice President met wlta the
librarians and immediate y thereafter transferred $50,000 to the Library for toe in
purchasing materials tha do not come in under the blanket order.
The Affirmative Actio
Office and the Committee are now operating.
The survey of the lar e classrooms is in progress and the results will determine
the ways by which diffic lties associated with the situation will be handled.
Wehmeyer has written o the City of Lubbock requesting crosswalks at Boston and
Flint at 19th and will c ntinue to follow up on that matter.
The resolution, appro ed by the Student Association, concerning pass/fail has
been received by the Sen te president. The resolution concerns moving the data for
opting for pass/fail to he middle of the semester or later.
In response to the Se ate president's letter concerning the late date on which
class rolls had been rec ived by facity, Ewalt cited several reasons for the lateness
and possible solutions.
Wilson read from a me
Sciences, dated October
provide for it, recent a
worthy of tenure should
the Senate is taking ste
do so.
orandum sen by the Office of the Dean, College of Arts and
, 1980: "Al hough the Tenure Policy does not specifically
ministrativ thinking has been that an assistant professor
of promotion." Wilson expressed concein that
lso be wort
Tenure
Policy and that nobody else bothers to
e
s to keep t
Nelson said this was ot new poli
without being promoted. Newcomb sai
it should be a departmen al matter.
Rude pointed out that people have been tenured
he believed the two should go together but that
Newcomb moved that th paragraph e referred to the Tenure & Privilege Comrittee
and asked that the Commi tee conside this as a unilateral change in the Tenure Policy.
The motion carried by a ote of 15 t 8.
The meeting adjourned at 5:40 p.m.
k1/44
41L,
David Leon Rigddh, Sec:etary
The Faculty Senate
11/25/80