Faculty Senate Meeting Minutes
December 5, 2014
Founders Hall, Room 404
Senators Present: Stephen Anderson, Veronica Molina, Agnes Tang, Carl Mueller,
Doug Dyer, Bill Cargill, Pauline Moseley, Todd Duncan, Michelle Dietert, Bradley
Almond
Proxies Present: Sam Fiala
Guests: Clarence Enochs, Sean Kelly, Dr. Deb Davis, Dr. Russ Porter, Dr. Jeffrey Kirk,
Dr. Peg Gray-Vickrey, Cindy Guzman
Call to Order (Stephen Anderson)
 Quorum Confirmation ( Dr. Tang )
Gavel Presentation (Clarence Enochs and Sean Kelly ): Shortly after April 30, 2009
(the day the land agreement went through), student body president, Clarence
Enochs, wanted to create a
cohesive bond between faculty,
staff and students. Mr. Enochs and
other students came out to the
building site for the university and
asked the forest service if they
could collect a piece of the first
wood that was removed from the
ground. The forest service agreed
to save two pieces from the first
trees that were removed from the
site: an oak and a cedar elm. Those
pieces were collected and saved.
Sean Kelly is a very talented
Figure 1: Senate President, Stephen Anderson, accepts
the Faculty Senate Gavel from Clarence Enochs and Sean
woodworker, and he was
Kelly: "This is a gift from all students by two students."
responsible for shaping those
pieces. The gavel represents what
it is like to come to the university unshaped and to be transformed by the faculty
and staff at the university. The box did not come from the tree, but it has the
university seal. Inside the box rests the gavel and strike plate for the faculty senate.
“This is a gift from all students by two students.”
Guest Reports
o Provosts Report (Dr. Gray-Vickrey): There is a sub committee of
faculty who is working on the Post tenure review SAP; it has gone
through its first revision. It will be coming to the faculty senate in the
future, grad council, faculty senate academic council, but that is in
process. We are the only university that doesn’t have a post tenure
review SAP, and it is shaping up very well.
o The academic master plan will come to the senate at the next meeting
(Feb. 6). It is important that the senate present recommendations for
changes. Please email those recommendations to Dr. Gray-Vickrey. This
document is a work in progress.
o For the last year, faculty advising has been given increasing attention.
Undergraduate advising is particularly tricky, especially the general
education requirements. Each college will eventually have one full-time
staff professional advisor that can handle many of those issues as well
as help with specific college curriculum.
o Academic suspensions were historically handled by the Provosts office,
but it should be handled at the college level. A new process is being
developed. In the past, academic affairs sends the letter, the student
comes in, the provosts office determines the suspension and the
parameters of that suspension and reinstatement. This process is going
to be moved down to the colleges. Academic affairs will still send the
letter. However, the first step will be to meet with the college advisor.
The advisor will meet with the student and come up with a draft plan of
action: including a list of recommended classes. Then, the student meets
with the Dean or designee within the college, and the dean will review
what the advisor recommended. If the dean does not agree, then the
student will be removed from all courses. If the dean agrees with the
plan, then the student will be allowed to take the courses. This spring is
our first semester with this process, so faculty input is encouraged.
Discussion: Consistency across departments is a concern. One faculty
member looking at an identical case may reach one diagnostic
conclusion, and another may decide the case differently. Is there some
kind of training to avoid this scenario? Of course. Each situation is
different. One challenge is to determine the accuracy of information
provided by students. The closer the situation is to the college, the
better the decision can be made. These types of situations illustrate why
the provosts office needs feedback on how the new process is working.
The assumption is that the advisor will know more about the situation.
What if the student gets suspended from the college of education, then
decides to change their major; will they still be suspended? Yes, even if
they change majors, they still have to wait out the suspension.
Faculty Senate Committee Reports
 Executive Committee:
o President’s Report (Steve Anderson): We finally have an internship
plan to present today. We spent about an hour and a half reviewing
that plan in the grad council. The document that will be reviewed
today is based on revisions to that document. The IRB is going to be
up for approval today, and we have associate provost Dr. Porter here
today and Dr. Deb Davis, the current chair of the IRB committee, will
answer questions today. Copies of that document were sent through
email.
o Treasurer’s Report (Veronica Molina): Budget report was
distributed. We still have $10,000, which will change next month. We
intended to use funds for the holiday party; however, the offices of the
President, the Provost, and Finance and Administration sponsored the
holiday party, so we didn’t use many funds from this account for the
party. Last month all we had was the lunch expense for the meeting.
We finally got an invoice from the TX Council of Faculty Senates, and
that expense will be included next month. Discussion: Dr. Anderson
would like to spend some money to bring a speaker to campus. This
person should speak to the entire university. We sent a survey to
faculty on how to spend these funds and received three responses: the
holiday party, a professional survey of culture and climate at
TAMUCT, and the PD event last year. Any further suggestions would
be greatly appreciated.

Faculty Affairs Committee (Steve Anderson): We have three items: T&P
SAP, faculty handbook, and faculty promotion pay. Dr. Gray-Vickrey sent the
committee the working T&P SAP; the committee is in the process of making
recommendations now and will circulate to the senate. The starting point for
the faculty handbook would be to set-up a website that contains basic items
that are typically included in a faculty handbook. Any item that we have SAPs
for will be linked to that website. This website will be available to all faculty.
Many of these SAPS are already out there, but a website will collate all of
those. There are several SAPs missing, which is why we cannot print a final
handbook for review now. If faculty would like to make a recommendation
regarding Faculty promotion and pay then the starting point is to see what
peer and aspirational institutions are doing. Dr. Gray-Vickrey stated that
those peer and aspirational institutions have changed. The committee was
directed to work through Dr. Troy Courville. Dr. Gray-Vickrey is concerned
with getting faculty pay up to the 50% level. All faculty senate presidents
from peer and aspiration insinuations have been contacted, but the
committee will continue to follow-up. Discussion: Is Dr. Courville
unilaterally deciding who our aspiration and peer institutions are? The past
focus was on institutions that serve military students rather than on degrees
offered.
Old Business
 Double Jeopardy on Tenure and Promotion: The senate passed a motion
on this issue. It is in the minutes from last month. Everyone agrees that
department chairs should not serve on tenure and promotion committees.
 Approval of Minutes from November meeting.
 Approval of Treasurer’s report.
 Internship SAP: There is going to be a small change (changes circulated).
Item 3.1, 3.2, and 3.5 caused concern. In 3.1 and 3.2 it makes the maximum
time for an internship 120 hours on site, give or take. That would not give
the individual a good experience in a computer development or operation
environment. The 120 hours is a minimum of on-site work, not a maximum.
The SAP should be revised to reflect that the hours are a minimum standard.
Also, what is contained in this 30 hours of coursework that students have to
do? It is up to the professor, but the SAP does not reflect who assigns the 30
hours, or whether faculty can do less than 30 hours. The SAP will be revised
to reflect that the instructor of record will assign those hours. Is the
instructor of record being compensated for that work? That issue is being
worked out with the workload policy. There should be a statement that
reflects compensation to faculty will be determined via the faculty workload
policy. Traditionally, if it is a non-paid internship then the instructor of
record is liable for any damages. Remember, this is a university-level SAP;
each college could have a more specific policy. Departments can have their
own, more stringent, requirements. Suggested addition to the end of the
document: Motion: approve the document with five amendments, (1) the
wording in 3.1 and 3.2, “This document establishes university minimums;
(2) individual colleges, departments, or instructors of record can increase
these minimums;” (3) compensation to faculty will be determined via the
faculty workload policy; and (4) addition of 3.6: “This document establishes
university minimums; individual colleges, departments, or instructors of
record can increase these minimums.” Seconded. Discussion: Including
course numbers is not a good idea because if those change, then the whole
document will need to be reapproved. The course numbers are parenthetical
and can be deleted. Amended Motion: (5) To delete all parentheses in 2.2.
Call for the Question: Motion passes.
New Business
 IRB Handbook (Dr. Deb Davis): Federal regulations state that our
institutional official, which is Dr. Porter, is responsible for setting the
committee members as well as designated who will be the chair. As far as
the rest of the handbook, over the past 1.5 years the committee has taken an
existing document (with permission) and review it. There are still revisions
underway, such as reporting child abuse. The law in the handbook is not
corrected and is being corrected, as well as other minor changes.
Discussion: There is a section on pg. 18 that refers to blood draws. For

many reasons, it may be better to omit specifications that are wrong.
Instead, it should state that a licensed medical practitioner should establish
the rules. How do you deal with classes that teach human subjects research
methods or how do you deal with thesis students. Neither of those areas are
covered. Does the faculty need to have certification to teach these areas, and
do students need certification to do homework assignments? Every case is a
case-by-case assessment. So if you believe you are exempt then you need to
go through the IRB to grant that exemption. Only the IRB has the authority to
exempt a project. This is a living document going forward. In the end, only
the IRB can determine exemptions and/or approve requests. The handbook
is about 99% where is needs to be, but it is a living document and changes
are ongoing. Discussion: Could we defer final approval until final approval
is given? Yes, the changes could be made in time for the next senate meeting,
Feb. 6, 2015. Motion: Approve the IRB manual as a draft with another
review in February 2015. No second. Discussion: Dr. Porter needs an
approved, working draft. Motion: Approve the IRB manual as presented
with further review in February. Seconded. Discussion: We want to bring
the IRB back up for discussion in February. Motion Amended to reflect that
review process. Call the Question: Motion Passes with one abstention.
Senate Executive Committee Election: Stephen Anderson nominates Todd
Duncan as the new Parliamentarian. Motion to accept by acclimation.
Seconded. Motion passes unanimously.
Announcements
o We need workers for the holiday party: greeters at the door for both
entrances. It is being sponsored by the President, Provost, and Finance and
Administration, but it is hosted by the Senate, so it is our responsibility to
take care of this security issue.
Meeting Adjourned