Texas Tech University
The Faculty Senate
3-G Holden Hall
Lubbock, Texas 794091(806) 742-3656
March 4, 1986
TO:
Members of t e Faculty Senate
FROM:
Margaret E. 'Peg" Wilson, President
SUBJECT:' Agenda for M-eting #77, March 12, 1986
The Faculty Senat will meet on Wednesday, March 12, 1986 at 3:30 p.m.
in the Senate Room of he University Center. The agenda is as follows:
Introduction of uests
II.
Approval of the inutes of the February 12, 1986 meeting
III. Election of offi ers
IV.
V.
Report of Standi g Committees
A.
Committ e on Committees - Minifie (see attachment)
B.
Study C mmittee C - Burnett (see attachment)
C.
Study C mmittee A - Cravens
Report of Ad Hoc Committee
Financial E igency - Aycock
VI.
VII.
Old Business
Usage (LISD) - Haragan
A.
Compute
B.
Grade p sting - Haragan
C.
Faculty Club - Platten
New Business
tudy Committee report - Collins
A.
Tenure
B.
Budget ieport - Harigan
VII. Other Business
(see back of this page for additional agenda items)
"An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Institution"
IX. Announcements
A.
Congrat lations are in order for Senator Henry Wright for
receivi ig the highest honor bestowed by the Society for Rang
Managem nt at it recent international meeting. Henry was
present :d the Renner Award for his contribution to the
profess on through the use of fire as an ecological tool
for imp oving and managing rangelands in North America.
B.
Congrat lations also are given to our Parliamentarian,
Vernon cGuire who was recognized by District III, comprised
of more than 40 universities and colleges, of the National
Debate ournament. Vernon was presented the award for
dedicat on and service in the areas of coaching, teaching,
judging and administration of forensics.
C.
The Age da Committee will meet on March 28 at 2:00 p.m.
All att chments should be in to Grace prior to that time
for inc usion with the April agenda.
X. Adjournment
Attachment IV. A
Committee on Committee Report
To fill the vacan y on the Convocations Committee the Committee on
Committees suggests th following persons for Senate approval:
Francis Fuse ier, Theatre Arts
Robert Gades College of Education
Attachment IV. B
Faculty Senate Study C mmittee C Report
The Committee recommen s the following:
1.
That all depa tment or area chairpersons serve at the pleasure
of the dean a d that they be subject to mandatory review every
three years.
2.
That a chairp rson be subject to removal at any time.
3.
That in the m tter of evaluating chairpersons the several colleges
or schools de elop evaluation procedures suitable to the needs of
each college ir school.
4.
That the seco d sentence in paragraph 2C (OP 32.03, Vol. I) be
deleted becau e it is redundant.
5. That the OP b
revised carefully:
a.
to r flect the fact that the School of Law
does not have departments or areas, and
b.
that the sections in the OP about chairpersons be
edit d and reviscd carefully to reflect any and
all hanges.
This after oon I shald like to speak to some of the isues
which ere of ut ost importance to this faculty and to facul es
across the stat
The number one issue,in my opinion, is faculty governa e or
the lack of sam • The erasion of faculty governance has b
occurring for a number of years. Contrary to opinion of so faculties do no
wish "to run" their various universities. the
hat
they do desire
s input into decisions which affect their p fes-
sional lives.
his input has to be more than token brief in. , it
can best be acc
plished by judicious use of university co ttees
and faculty sen tes or councils. In matters of serious con quence,
such as tenure
d financilal exigency policies, the faculty s a
whole should be included i tt the decision-making procedure.
Boards of
women. To be s
gents are composed largely of business men d
e, large Universities have many Of the same char-
acteristics of a business. There is, however, on big diffe ence
between administ ation of a business and that of an educatio al
institution and
hat difference can be summed up 41 one word
collegiality.
ile colle iality has its roots in the churci, it
has been associa ed with 1.1gher education almost as long as here
have been such i stitution in this country. University co unities
tend to look upo
themselvs more as families than businesse . But
even if you buy
he busineOs theory, faculty governance is s ill a
viable option.
eters and Waterman, in their best seller,
Search of Excell fl ee, iden ified eight characteristics share by
25 successful ma or corpor tions. One of those eight was pr ductivity through p ople. Th se successful corporations were p ople
1
2
oriented. They recognized the value of their employees!
university I ca
assure you that the faculty is as adamant
administrator i
wanting quality. Perhaps the faculty is e -n
S any
more zealous in wanting excellence than top management. Af Br all,
reaents and pre - idents come and go, but good faculty live t rough
a number of adm nistrative changes.
I should l' ke to speak to the charge that has been mad
the faculty are self-serving. The detractors who make thes
that
charges
have never serv d on a faculty committee. From personal ex erience
I can assure yo
that when faculty are given an opportunity 7.0 con-
tribute to poli •
and deciSion making they tend to lean over back-
ward to protect
he institution. It gives faculty no pleasu _7e to
see the institu
on, to which they have devoted their expert se
and energies, b
ome the object of bad publicity and derisio n which
can only have a
egative effect on faculty and student recru Lting.
Faculty do
are! Please give us the chance to use the aisdom
and expertise wh ' h we possess to make the institutions of hLgher
education the ve y best they can be in this state. We will not let
you down.
The second
ost important issue in higher eduction is the con-
tinuance of tenu e. Please note that I did not say anything about
a tenure policy.
If faculty governance is alive and well there will
be no problem on a specific policy--administration and faculty
working together will solve that problem. The issue is whether or
not tenure is ne essary at all. The answer must be a resouncing
"YES". Tenure
not a method by which those who are lazy or incom-
petent are grant d a life time job. I have read many tenure policies
3
and I have yet
find one which does not allow the option for
ridding the ins itution c) incompetent or immoral tenured faculty
members. What
do find is a document which protects a faculty
member from bei g fired for personal or political reasons or for
teaching materi 1 which may be considered controversial if taat
material is wit in his/her area of expertise. We are not in our
positions to tu n out fact -laden little robots. On the contrary,
as our students leave our universities we hope that we may have
been one of the instruments which will cause them to think—think
through the iss es which will face them as they go about their
professions, ra se their children, serve their communities, state,
and nation. In four years every potential problem cannot be delved
into but if the
have been given the knowledges and techniques
necessary to th
k through an issue and make an independent decision,
then we have b
successful. We can only accomplish this if we
are given the p ivilege of academic freedom through tenure.
Finally, t
importance.
issues related to teacher excellence are of utmost
ill speak to only three. Texas institutions have
long been at
sadvantage in recruiting outstanding faculty when
it is discovere
that there is no funding for sabbaticals. 3ven
the smallest of
nstitutions in other states recognize the need for
post-doctoral
k; a chance to travel to other institutions to
survey differen
methodology, equipment, organization, or other
facets of a dis
pline; or the opportunity to travel and study out-
side the bounda
es of the United States. The results obtained
from sabbatical
eaves enrich not only the faculty member, but the
students who b
fit from increased expertise, and the institution
4
as a whole.
While we a e already facing a loss of funding, it is i perative
that we avoid t e easy remedy of reducing the number of fac lty by
creating "monst
" classes. Those who say that one can tea 64 300
as easily as 30 are wrong. One can impart facts to 300 as
as 30 but teach ng involves interchaAges between teacher an
students, stude ts and sttidents. In large classes most stu nts
believe that th y have no personal identity but are simply ambers.
Due to simple 1 gistics, testing procedures revert to objec ivetype items whic
than permanent
reveal only fleeting remembrance of facts .ther
bility to reason and apply facts. Let us n t cheat
an entire gener tion of coillege students by taking an easy olution to a diffi ult financial problem.
Finally, m st faculty are not turned off or afraid of acuity
evaluations, if
hey are apcomplished in a fair and imparti L man-
ner. We would
joice if the same fair and impartial evalu 7,ions
could be applie
to administrators, from the department cha _ level
all the way to
e top.
A number of S
behalf at the
Education on
and I offer t
representing
nators have asked to see what was said in their
hearing befOre the Select Committee on Higher
ebruary 13, 1986. The Agenda Committee concurred
is, not as an example - of great prose but as hopefully
our major concerns.
MEW