Tex s Tech University
The Faculty Senate
ovember 7, 1980
TO:
Members of the Faculty Senate
FROM: Roland E. smith, Presi ent
SUBJECT: Agenda for meeting 127, November 12, 1980
The Faculty senate will eet.on Wednesday, November 12, 1980 at 3 30 p.m.
in the Senate Room of the Uni ersity Center. The agenda is a follows:
I. Minutes of the October 8, 1980 meeting
II. Visitor: StEte Senator
III. Report of Faculty Statu
• L. Short
and Welfare Committee -- Larkin
IV. Research Merit Salary -- R. Smith
V.
Other BusinesE
VI. Announcements
A.
Excerpts from the mi utes of the October 14, 1980 meeting of
the Academic Council
B.
Correspondence
Lubbock, Texas 79409/(806) 742-3656
AGENDA ITEM
Page 1.
III.
Minutes of Facult Status and Welfare Committee meeting, October 23,
80
Present: Collins Kimmel, La kin, McPherson, Nelson, Tereshkovich, co lmittee members, a d Rodric Sc oen of the University Tenure and Privil- e
Committee.
The meeting as called t order by Panze Kimmel, chairperson pro
who presented as he first or er of business the selection of a perma
chairperson. Mur A. Larkin as selected as chairperson, and assumed
chair.
The letter f
read, the Chair r
the University te
Tereshkovich seco
minor modificatio
amendment to the
The proposed revi
comments by the U
Attachment A.
om Roland S
cognized Sc
ure policy.
ded that th
s, to the F
niversity p
ion, as rec
iversity Te
The Committe next consi
Committee spell o t in detail
ing the proposed hange to Un
discussion, Colli s moved and
em,
nt
he
ith, President, Faculty Senate, having
en
oen, who presented a proposed revision •
Following discussion, Kimmel moved and
Committee recommend the proposal, with
culty Senate as a substantial and desira le
hey. The motion was carried unanimous
mmended, is attached hereto, together w'
ure and Privilege Committee thereon, as
ered the request of President Smith that the
the procedures to be followed in implemii
versity tenure policy. Following subst. tial
Nelson seconded the following:
a. That the Faculty Sen te as a body consider and approve the p 'posed revision of University olicy, and forward copies of its action hereon to the Univers 'ty administ ation and faculty for information.
b. That the Faculty Se te thereafter call a full faculty meeti ': at
which the full f ulty will h ve an opportunity to consider and act up on
the proposed rev ion.
c. That th
the full faculty
to the Board of
Following f
Faculty Se te thereafter officially submit the act)
o the Presi ent of the University for his presentat3
gents.
on
ther discus ion, the motion was carried unanimously
next consi
The Committ
eduction."
Plan for Faculty
ation of this pr • osal was de
have a greater o portunity to
There being
on
ered the previously proposed "Contingent V
Following discussion, definitive considt erred until members of the Committee sh e uld
study and evaluate it.
further b siness, the Committee adjourned.
of
AGENDA ITEM III.
Page 2.
VISION OF T U TENURE POLICY, PART IV, SECTION 8
PROPOSED
1
2
8. If apr bationary f culty member believes that a decision
deny reappointme
3
(a) was
4
(b) was
5
6
7
8
9
10
de for reas ns violating academic freedom;
II II
de without
dequate consideration of professional
performance;
de after si nificant noncompliance with prescribed
(c) was
procedures;
(d) was b sed upon fa tors lacking a substantial relationship
ss or perfo mance; or
professional fit
(e) was
II .1
sed upon a
riterion not listed among the prescribe
a for reapp intment or admission to tenure,
11
evaluative crite
12
the faculty memb
13
specific grounds
upportingt em, in writing to the chairperson of the
14
University Stand
g Committee on Tenure and Privilege. The elected m bers
15
of the Committee
hall give p eliminary consideration to the faculty
16
member's complai
17
cause for the co
laint, the
18
procedures outli
d in Sectio
VI, except that the faculty member sha
19
be responsible f
stating th
grounds upon which the allegations are
20
based and shall
21
In no cas
22
was for reasons
23
duly considered
24
thereof.
Zw I
may presen
these allegations, which shall include
If the C mmittee concludes that there is probabl
atter shall be heard in accordance with h
ar the burd n of proof.
shall the C mmittee find probable cause if nonreapp ntment
f bona fide
d authorize
inancial exigency or in consequence of
deletion of an academic program or par
AGENDA ITEM III.
Page 3.
Comments
The University T ure and Fri
established by the Bo rd of Regent
(1) to make
important functions:
ere is "pro
and (2) to decide if
enied
reappo
ulty member has been
ilege Committee (hereinafter "the Commit tee") is
in the TTU Tenure Policy. The Committ e has two
recommendations pertaining to the tenure policy,
able cause" that a complaining probation ry facntment for reasons violating academic f eedom.
The proposed rev
Under the present tex
the Committee of prob
activates a Special H
adversary proceeding
administration is the
Special Hearing Commi
Tenure Policy, Part V
sion relates to the Committee's "probable cause" func
of the TTU enure Policy, Part IV, Section 8, a fin
ble cause t t a violation of academic freedom has o
aring Commit ee to hear the faculty member's complai
herein the f culty member is the petitioner and the
respondent. The findings and recommendations, if an
tee are pres ented to the Board of Regents for action.
, 1976-77 F culty Handbook, pp. 47-48.)
The proposed rev
the Committee might f
to find probable caus
The Committee is neut
ber or the University
sion substa
nd probable
should not
al. It is
administrat
tially increases the specific grounds up -1 which
cause that a violation has occurred. Au "lority
be confused with the exercise of that au lority.
either advocate nor adversary of the fac Lty memon.
Expansion of the
by the persistent pro
"academic freedom" an
bationary faculty mem
supplementary proscri
the proper goals and
a fair personnel poli
probable ca
lems encoun
the need t
ers who are
tions--some
dministrati
y.
se grounds beyond "academic freedom" is
ered in defining the precise meaning and
provide specific additional safeguards
denied tenure or reappointment. These p
procedural, some substantive--are consis
n of the tenure policy and consistent as
Tenure should no
fessional performance
contrary to the best
dangers the tenure sy
or reappointment for
sions to award or den
with prescribed proce
be made for legitimat
be awarded
are deficie
nterests of
tem itself.
nqualified
tenure, to
ures, be ma
reasons.
d proto faculty members whose qualifications
is
t. Awarding tenure to unqualified perso
enthe faculty and the University and there
tenure
This proposed revision does not guarant
ersons. The revision merely requires th t decireappoint or terminate, be made in accor 11. nce
and
e after consideration of relevant factor
The proposed rev
text of Part IV, Sect
vision specifically i
Committee on Tenure a
and custom, states th
elected members of th
Academic Affairs are
years have not partic
sion also i
on 8. In a
entifies th
d Privilege
t the "prob
Committee.
x officio m
pated in th
cludes less significant changes to the p
cordance with past practice and custom,
"faculty committee" as the University S
The revision, again reflecting past pr
ble cause" complaint shall be considered
Although the President and Vice Preside
mbers of the Committee, these officers i
probable cause proceedings of the Commi
The final paragr ph of the p oposed revision makes explicit what has
been implicit.
:ion.
i_ng by
curred
; in an
niversity
, of the
(TTU
aquired
scope of
3r pro3posed
2nt with
well with
sent
e reanding
ctice
by the
t for
past
tee.
lways
AGENDA ITEM IV.
GUIDELINtS ON SPECIAL MERIT
Y INCREASES ! BASED ON RESEARCH PERFORMANCE
Funds released by re
will be used to provide f
members, beginning on Ja
scholarly research and pr
record of research but w
through outstanding teac
may be recommended.
earch appointments and other available University re
3 one-time laerit increases for approximately 100 fac
ary 1, 1981. These merit awards are to be based on
ductivity; in rare instances, a faculty member who
has made clearly meritorious contributions to the
ng or in other ways appropriate to the institution's
sources
lty
outstanding
as a modest
iversity
mission
Allocations have be
made to eah college, based 50% on professional heajd count and
50% on performance in spo sored research. Merit increases may range from $l0 co to $1200
with an average of $1100. These will'be added to the 1980-81 base salary rat but payment
will be prorated for the ear (thus, a faculty member appointed for nine mont s will be
paid 5/9 of the increase his academic year).
Recommendations for
after consultation with
associate dean/coordinato
and associate deans, etc.
mance. It is expected t
merit program. Each reco
imately 100 words and wi
Academic Affairs.
ecipients of awards should be made by the dean of e
propriate departmental chairpersons or coordinators
for research. Administrative personnel (chairpers
maybe eligible for the award on the basis of resea
t only tenured personnel will participate in this p
endation should be accompanied by a supporting stat
be reviewed in the offices of Research and Graduat
ch college,
and the
ns, assistant
ch perforrticular
ent of approxStudies and
Certain departments ave worked diligently in developing their sponsored research
initiaprograms. In recognitio of these efforts and as an encouragement to departm
'le basis of
tive, some awards are st ngly suggested for those departments qualifying on
research performance. E cept in unusual circumstances, faculty members in th se departments
e number of awards indicated on the accompanying do anent (they
should receive at least
may, of course, receive ore than that number). Exceptions should be clearly xplained.
While criteria for j dging the quality and quantity of research accompliE"Iment will
appropriately vary from cademic area to area, the following should be considered in
evaluations:
1.
Conduct of spon ored projects.
2.
Publication in efereed journals and other media of recognized statu
3.
Development and submission of good grant/contract proposals.
4.
Subjective judg ent of peers and supervisor(s).
5.
National reputa ion in research.
6.
Supervision of utstanding theses/dissertations and development of situdent
researchers.
It is imperative th t each award go to a recipient whose record of accom
clearly is worthy of rec gnition. To do otherwise undermines the objectives
special incentives progr m.
ishment
this
Recommendations are due no latet than November 15 in the Office of Acade ic Affairs.
pleted.
Changes of status should not be initiated until the review process has been c
AGENDA ITEM VI.
Page 1.
A. Selected it s from minu es of Academic Council Meetings
October 14, 1980
1.
There was brief discussion of the interdisciplinary research ta
forces. Prcfessors Hagler, Hopkins, and Lefkowitz, head the
teams concerned with energy, food, and health, respectively. D
were encouraged to invite the task force leaders to meet with
faculties ir the respective colleges to describe the work
activities End to provide opportunity for additional input.
as
2.
Attention was called to a management-by-objective procedure bet
used in the College of Agricultural Sciences. The need to deve
and use objEctives as a management tool was discussed. Attenti
was also drawn to an eatlier presentation by Dean Anderson as a
effort beinE, used to meat a management-by-objectives approach.
The value of setting objectives was also noted as providing a t
for improvec comidunicatilons.
3.
A plan for special merit increases based primarily on research
performance was discussed. The intent of the proposal was to
provide incteases, within funds released by research appointmen
and other available resdurces, to highly productive faculty. I
order for tte increases to be of significance, a nine months ba
rate improvEment of froi $1000-$1200 is to be made available fo
recognition of 100 facu ty. The basis of allocations to colleg
was 50% on professional staff numbers and 50% on sponsored rese
levels. There was cons derable discussion regarding the progra
Comments were wide rang ng but noted the need to include a fact
for non-funced research i that there was concern for inadequacy
funds avathble, that t*e additions may be "too little and too
late" to have the desir d effect of faculty retention, that pris ides
should be established f r a broader return of indirect costs fr
research, aLd that ince tive programs should be developed
and implemeLted at the time the annual budget is made. After
discussion &.nd clarification of procedures, the program was
recommended by the Counlil.
4.
Council mem3ers expressed frustration with the problems of
providing adequate facukty salaries. They expressed a need
for early iavolvement iP budget planning and for involving the
President in developing understanding of budget needs.
B. Corresnondellpe
The followin correspondence has been sent from the Senate Office since
that which Tolls reported at the last Senate meeting.
1. Rod Schoen, acknowledging receipt of his committee's proposed ch
the university's tenure policy.
ges in
AGENDA ITEM VI.
Page 2.
Correspondence co tinued
2.
Fred Wehm yer, requesting parking for persons attending Senate meetings.
3.
Lauro F. avazos, Preaident, aoncerning the implementation of
recommend tion made by the Grievance Committee last spring.
4.
Michael C White, accepting his resignation from the Faculty S nate.
5.
Frank K. air, Vice Chairman, Faculty Council, Sam Houston Sta e University,
in answer to his request for a copy of the Constitution and By aws of
Texas Tec University's Faculty Senate.
6.
Lauro F. avazos, President, concerning the possibility of fin ncial aid
for the 1 "brary during the current fiscal year.
7.
Ralph L. ellmeyer, Mass Communications, outlining procedure b
faculty t attend out-of-town football games are selected.
8.
Len Ainsw rth, requesting specific pieces of information about the use
of the pa s/fail system on campus.
9.
Robert Ew lt, about the late date on which faculty members rec ived
class rol S.
which
10.
Lauro F. avazos, President, forwarding the resolution regardi
certain u iversity committee appointments which the Senate app oved at
the Octob r meeting.
11.
Ernest B. Fish, Park Administration and Landscape Architecture
him to co vene the Faculty Senate Committee on Elections.
12.
Panze B.
and Welf
asking
immel, Education, asking her to convene the Faculty Status
e Committee.
e in
13. Lauro F. avazos, President, asking that the Senate have a vo
the sele tion of persons to serve on the screening/advisory ommittees
the
being fo ed for the selection of persons to fill vacancies i
administ tion.
ittee's
14. Murray C ulter, Chairperson, Library Committee, asking that co
help in solution to the problem of inadequate janitorial se vice in
the libr ry over the weekends.
anate.
15.
Clarence A. Bell, accepting his resignation from the Faculty
16.
John Qu
17.
Lauro F. Cavazos, President, thanking him for his action rega
current inancial situation of the library.
ling the
18.
Len Ains orth, Interim Vice President for Academic Affairs, r
transfer ing of funds to the library.
garding
19.
James R.
concerning grievance.
cDonald, requesting that he convene Special Study C mmittee C.