MINUTES OF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #114
The Faculty Sen
Room of the Uni
presiding. Sena
Couch, Curry, D
Hayes, Hennesse
Nathan, O'Calla
Rinehart, R. Sm
Wagner, Westney
Kimmel, Lee, Me
were absent wit
I.
te met on
ersity Ce
ors prese
metrius,
Hildebr
han, Owen
th, Strau
Williams,
ta, Richa
reason.
Wednesday, March 14, 1990 in the 'enate
ter with President Julia Whitsitt
t were Barr, Beckner, Brink, Burn:tt,
rvin, Finn, Fish, Harp, Hall, Har well,
nd, Howe, Hurst, Long, McClendon, Mann,
, Pearson, Peters, Peterson, Piat
s, Tock, Trost, Troyansky, Vann,
and Wilson. Senators Andrews, Hi 1,
dson, J. Smith, Tallent and Thomp on
Introducti n of gues
President Whits
recognized the
Ainsworth, Vice
President for A
Denise Jackson,
Development; Ro
Cosby, Vice Pre
Publications; J
Swinney, Univer
tt called
ollowing
Provost;
ademic Af
Director
ert Sweaz
ident for
m Barlow,
it Daily
Professor John
liese ser ed as Parliamentarian for the mee ing.
the meeting to order at 3:34 p.m. and
uests: Robert Lawless, President, Len
irginia Sowell, Associate Vice
airs; Mary Ann Higdon, TTU Librarr
f Annual Giving, Office of
, Vice Provost for Research, Don
Fiscal Affairs; Steve Kauffman, News &
Lubbock Avalanche-Journal; and Connie
Considera ion of th minutes of the February 14, 1990
meeting.
The minutes wer
III.
Election
approved as circulated.
f Faculty Senate Officers for 1990-91
The nominating
Trost also ser
committee dist
Officers elect
President
Vice-Pres
Secretary
ommittee omposed of Senators Burnett, Finn 1 and
d as the lections committee. The elections
buted, collected, and counted written ballots,
were as ollows:
James Br nk
ent - Shelley Harp
Weldon B ckner
IV. Reports f
Faculty Senate Standing and Ad Hoc committees
A. Committee o
Senator Wagner
proposed commi
moved acceptan
nominations fo
preparing the
academic area
Committees
reported f r Senator Mehta, chairperson. The
tee list as distributed with the agenda. Wagner
e of the eport. Motion passed. Wagner asked for
committe s that have yet to be filled. In
ommittee ominations selections are made based on
nd gender.
B. Budget Stud
Senator Fish a nounced t at this committee is studying
hiring/firing tatistics by rank and plans to have the report
1
soon. Senator ish asked for the return of the questionnai
regarding salar es which as previously mailed.
C. Committee A
Senator Couch,
of librarians a
Senate. Facult
appointment are
or university c
library staff a
membership in t
recommended tha
apply to librar
recommendation.
hairperso
d archivi
members
not eligi
mmittees.
least si
e Faculty
the same
staff. S
Motion p
, reported regarding the incorpor tion
ts as representation on the Facul
ith a 50 percent or more administ ative
enate
le for membership on the Faculty
If this policy were extended to t
persons would be ineligible for
Senate. Committee A unanimously
policy that applies to faculty al
nator Couch moved the acceptance
this
ssed.
D. Committee C
Senator Brink s
proposal that T
dual-career cou
office for this
report as the p
bmitted a
xas Tech
les. Co
purpose.
sition of
written report (attached) evaluat ng the
niversity facilitate the employme t of
ittee C opposed the formation of
Senator Brink moved the adoption f the
the Faculty Senate. Motion passed
V.
ouncils
Report on
A. The Provost
Council eport is attached. The Academic C uncil
consisted only f routine matters. The Operations Council h s not
met since the 1 st Facult Senate meeting. The representati e to
the Development Council h d no report.
B. Senator Pete s distrib
research counci of the u
make comments s ould dire
Arts and Scienc s or Sena
ted a working document describing the
iversity (attached). Persons who ish to
t them to Jane Winer, Associate D an of
or Peters.
C. Senator Haye submitte
Council (attac d).
a written report from the Gradu
D. Senator Bri , represe
that this body is studyi
1. A coop ative edu
business or in stry as p
2. AIDS a reness wi
accessible pla s on camp
3. Alloca ion of $13
organizations
tative to the Student Senate, re
the following:
ation program in which students
rt of their university curricula.
h emphasis on placing condoms at
S.
000 among the various campus
rted
rk in
E. Senator Wes ney report ed for the Comprehensive Writing
Force on thei study of the implications for teaching the
comprehensive riting cl sses, especially for junior facul
members.
VI. Old Busin ss
A. Vice Presi ent for F scal Affairs Don Cosby summarized
Coopers & Lybr nd report on medical insurance programs. T
report provide an overv ew of the years between 1983 and
2
he
89
and a detailed
1. The followin
a. Health care
is a little ove
b. The administ
we are on a pre
on some of the
c. Health care
of the newer fe
d. The vast mai
therefore we ha
might make an a
the other hand,
University Medi
hospitals in th
enter into cont
prescription dr
costs we could
somewhat.
nalysis o
summary
nsurance
priced.
at ion cos
ium stabi
eatures o
roviders
tures of
rity of t
e an oppo
reement w
Lubbock h
al Center
country
acts with
gs consti
ssue pres
an eighteen months period.
oints were presented:
s a little underpriced; life insurance
s of Equicor is relatively high. Since
ization funding plan, our program takes
self insurance.
xpress extreme hesitancy regarding some
he plan, such as HMO's.
e Texas Tech employees are in Lubbock,
tunity to use our purchasing power. We
th one or more of the hospitals. On
spitals, with the exception of the
are at 95 percent utilization. Mcst
re at 65 percent utilization. We could
major physician groups. Since
ute about 8 to 10 percent of our total
ription drug cards and reduce this cost
2. We could con
new medical tec
We considered s
route. The sta
Committees of s
approach. The
which includes
the Texas Tech
Vice President
Committee. We
that we can tak
ider self
nologies
lf-insura
e of Texa
veral mai
oordinati
11 Texas
health i
on Cosby
pe to hay
bids and
insurance. The problem is that s me
ause large swings in utilization rates.
ce last year and decided not to gc. this
may develop a self-insurance plan.
3 agencies are considering this
g Board Advisory may produce a pl n
enior universities. Questions reg rding
surance plan may be directed eith r to
office or to the university Bene its
a direction within the next 30 d ys so
have a plan ready by September 1, 1990.
II
tsitt ann unced that she is working with th Dean
B. President
of Students' Of ice to im lement the three-year-old report rom
the Task Force n Academi Dishonesty.
VII. New Busi
tsitt rep rted that she and Senator Wagner e
A. President
ances Sag , Coordinating Board staff member
recently with
assigned to Te s Tech. T e west Texas region constitutes er
he was on campus to get a feel for specific
assigned area.
ate hers -if regarding the status of Texas ech.
issues and to
She knows a gr t deal ab ut the faculty concerns and is
the faculty perspective. We discussed the
sympathetic wi
administration faculty relations, governance structure, and
to the s ringent budget. She would like all,
problems relat
faculty who ha e questio s about the Coordinating Board to get in
touch with her
B. The Revise Grievanc Procedures have arrived in the F ulty
the
Senate office. The revision proposes to reduce the steps i
procedure, re ve the ti e limits, and change the administ ative
officer from t e preside t to the provost. Whitsitt will r fer
the proposal t a senate committee.
3
C. President
frrom a faculty
departments. T
existence of a
faculty role in
Provost Haragan
that the Facult
describing what
Senator Henness
Senate consider
administrative
recommendations
itsitt an
member ci
is letter
niversity
administr
there is
Senate c
the natur
y moved t
the issue
tructurin
to the Se
ounced that she had received a le ter
ing a proposed merger between two
inquired regarding the pOssible
wide policy to ensure an appropri t
tive re-structuring. According to
o written policy. This letter req ested
nsider proposing a general policy
of faculty participation should e.
at a sub-committee of the Faculty
of faculty participation in
of colleges and provide
ate. With a second the motion pas ed.
D. Senator Swea y was con ratulated on receiving the Engine r of
the Year award.
VIII. Remarks b
Associat
Vice-President Sowell
A. Faculty cony cation wi 1 be April 3, in the University T eater
at 3:30 P esident L wless will give a state of the
university addr ss and fa ulty awards will be given.
B. Commencement
name of the spe
9:00 a.m. at wh
degrees will be
diplomas will b
will be M
ker is kn
ch the do
awarded e
awarded
C. The Task For
has received a
response is due
discuss the var
e on Stud
esponse f
March 15.
ous reco
II
y 12. Faculty will be informed wh n the
wn. The all-university ceremony i at
toral candidates will be hooded ad
masse. At 11:00 a. m. and 1:00 p m.
ndividually within each college.
nt Evaluations, headed by Dean Ha
om the Senate. The Student Senate
The Task Force will then meet to
endations and revise their report
D. Faculty are nvited to submit nominations for Vice-Presi ent
for Development to Dean S m Curl, College of Agricultural
Sciences.
IX. Announceme
A. The Agenda C mmittee w 11 meet Monday, April 2, at 1:30
B. All committ
reports for th
chairper ons and conveners should complet
May meeti g of the Faculty Senate.
The meeting adi urned at
:03 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Wagner
Secretary 1989-90
their
Attachment, Item V., C
To: Faculty Sena te
From: Faculty Se late Repreentative on the Graduate Council
Subject:
Graduat B Council Meeting of March 1, 1990
The issue Df the pubIication of theses or dissertat ons
1.
involving student /faculty collaboration is somewhat more corn lex
than reported in the minute 0 of the meeting and implied in "a ter
considerable dis .-:ussion" ptarase.
Normally, the student bec mes
the holder of ,he copyright since he is supposed to
ave
contributed origi aal researOh.
The dissertation/thesis dire tor
(who may have acq Aired funding for the whole project) also c uld
have
contribute i original research.
This situation
w uld
normally indicat
joint authorship (with the student as f rst
author).
Some s tudents, hOwever, do not move quickly in t ing
the necessary s teps in putting the thesis/dissertation
nto
publication form (or in cooperating with the faculty resear her
to that end) and therefore hinder the publication efforts of the
faculty member.
some type f agreement is needed, therefore,
to
permit the facul .-,y member o publish results unilaterally a ter
the elapse of som B specified amount of time.
Copyright viola ion
is a possible imp lication
this procedure is not thought out in
a comprehensive fashion. 1 If there are other dimensions or
implications to this issue faculty members are urged to pint
these out to the Dean of the Graduate School.
ir
Robert A. Hayes
Senator
Attachment, Item IV.
March 14, 1990
Report from Facul y Senate Study Committee C
Re: Dual-career c uple
Committee C exa ined the March 19, 1989, report of th
"Committee on Dual- areer CoLiples" addressed to Executive Vic
President and Provo -t Haragan. The 1989 report is contained i
the Faculty Senate genda for the March 14, 1990, meeting.
After carefully c nsidering both the philosophy of a policy o
hiring dual-career couples and the specific recommendation
submitted to Dr. H ragan in the March 29 report, Committee
offers the followin :
1. Dual-career co pies are More plentiful in academe than eve
before, and satisfa tion and long term commitment to Texas Tec
might be facilitat d if both partners had employment in thei
chosen fields in the sam0 geographical locale. However
Committee C regist rs concern that a formal policy to hir,
dual-career couples may discriminate against qualified applicant'
with other personal profiles.
2. There is no a
need be established
the situation arise
be married to each
should work togeth
offices to coordina
a formal office
departments couldn
properly belongs t
recognizes that du
such an effort sho
units involved tha
considered.
Then
every effort to hi
place to administe
support is called f
no circumstances sh
to hire someone not
dual-career policy
reement or Committee C that a formal offi
to foster dual-career couple placement. Wh
in which two qualified individuals happen t
other, then the academic units in questi
r and with the appropriate administrati
e hiring. Committee C is strongly opposed ti
hich mig t be construed to "make dea
refuse" hen the initiative for such hirip
Although Committee
the aca emic unit.
1-career ouple hiring might be beneficia
ld result from the satisfaction of academi
the best qualified individuals are bei
n only then should the administration mak
e the candidates. The administration is
and it should provide support when su
r by the appropriate academic units. Und
uld a department or area be forced or entic
of their Ohoosing, no matter how desirable
ight be.
Attachment, Item V., B - R search Council
THE RESEARCH PHILOSOPHY
OF CEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY
Texas Tech University, designated by the State of
Texas and by the Federal g vernment as one of the nation's
select research universities, accepts the responsibilities
of conducting research that will advance its academic
strengths, the economic development of Texas, and the
well-being of the Nation a d humanity. Texas Tech
University is a comprehens ve graduate research university
offering an array of under raduate, master's, doctoral and
special professional degre s. The faculty and students of
Texas Tech Unive:sity are Committed to advancing its
international reputation aS a center for excellence in
research and education. Scholarship is fostered by the
following philosophical principles and commitments
essential for the practice of unfettered inquiry:
1. The University supportt and values a full spectrum of
research activit_es. Theord "research" in this context
embodies a comprehensive range of creative undertakings.
Such projects may be traditional or innovative, funded or
unfunded. and include basic and applied investigations in
the sciences and techno1og r , development, production
research and technologynsfer,
tr, scholarly inquiry in
the humanities, Ind original contributions in fine arts
and performing a:ts. Research productivity may be defined
by various disciplines Out it is not smpopvmous with the
receipt of extramural
. The rare and valuable
intellectual gif:s required to accomplish these missions
are supported by the UnivOsity through its committment to
develop and main:ain many Centers of excellence in
research.
2. Research is problem-dr ven, and may cut across
disciplinary bouldaries. 1Iew disciplinary and
interdisciplinart organizational structures have evolved,
and will continua to evolv, to respond to the current and
future needs of pur facult .
3. As a steward of knowle ge for humankind, the
University is idaologicall and financially committed to
supporting all s=holarly f nctions, including
research--the practice ess ntial in scholarship.
4. The continuous and rig rous affirmation of academic
Research Philos • • hy
page 2
freedom and ind • endent Sc
University susta ns its Sc
excellence in re earch. T
independent scho Larship, t
life.
5. As one of th
Texas Tech Unive
responsibility t
The University
art, humanities,
possible for fac
spirit and impr
researchers are
in their search
humanity.
olarship at Texas Tech
olars and their work toward
e University encourages
e sine qua non of academic
nation's leading research institutions,
sity proutilly acknowledges its
expand Ole frontiers of knowledge.
grateful l to patrons of its programs in
sciences and engineering who have made it
lty and students to uplift the human
ve human Oonditions. Dedicated
nvited to join its faculty and students
or knowle ge and their service to
Attachment, Item V. A, Priost Council
Report on Provos s Council Meeting
March 5, 1990
Graduate Dean Cly
that he is commit
recruiting gradua
recruiting alread
and departments,
"generic" videota
buying lists of p
Service, and hiri
Marty Grassel of
e Hendric reported to the Provost's Counci
ing some f his discretionary budget to
e student . His efforts will support the
being do e by individual colleges, schools
nd will i clude such things as preparing
es to be upplemented with specific materia
tential s udents from the Educational Testi
g a gradu te student recruiter to work with
ew Studen Relations.
A proposed revisi
discussed. After
will be forwarded
reduces the compl
eliminates the sp
process.
n of the Paculty Grievance Procedure was
some further revision and editorial work it
to the Senate for comment. The new versionl
xity of the present procedure and entirely
cific timei limits on the various stages of
411
he
•