xt7d513txj3f https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7d513txj3f/data/mets.xml University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate Kentucky University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate 1994-09-12  minutes 2004ua061 English   Property rights reside with the University of Kentucky. The University of Kentucky holds the copyright for materials created in the course of business by University of Kentucky employees. Copyright for all other materials has not been assigned to the University of Kentucky. For information about permission to reproduce or publish, please contact the Special Collections Research Center. University of Kentucky. University Senate (Faculty Senate) records Minutes (Records) Universities and colleges -- Faculty University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, September 12, 1994 text University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, September 12, 1994 1994 1994-09-12 2020 true xt7d513txj3f section xt7d513txj3f UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY

LEXINGTON. KEN". UCKY 40506-0032


29 August 1994

Members, University Senate

The University Senate will meet in regular session on Monday,

September 12, 1994: at 3:00 PM in room 201 of the Nursing Building
(CON/HSLC). Please note the room change.


Minutes: March 7, 1994 and April 11, 1994 (circulated)
Introductions and Chair's Announcements


Remarks by President Charles T. Wethington, Jr.

Annual Report from the Academic Ombud, Professor Horst Schach

Action Items

a. Proposal to amend yniversity Senate Rules, Section I - Prior Service Advisory Committee (circulated under
date of 30 August 1994).

Proposal to amend University Senate Rules, Section V -, Withdrawal Rule. (Circulated under date of 31
August 1994.)



The Un1vers113 Senate met in regular session at 3:00 p. m., Monday, September 12,1994 in Room 201 Of
the Nursing Health sciences Building. '

Professor Raymond Cox, Chairperson of the'Senate Council, presided. . -,. ,

Members absent were: Kevin Adams Reginald Alston Dan Altman James Applegate, John Ballantine,
Mark Berger, Gary Bibbs*, Jana Bowling, Dean Brothers Joseph Burch Lauretta Byars, Brad Canton, Ben
Carr, Edward Carter, Jordan Cohen Delwood Collins Virginia Davis-Nordin*, Richard Edwards, David
Elliott, Robert Farquhar*, Joseph Fink, Michael Freeman, Richard Furst, Lorraine Garkowe’h Anne Haas,
Kirby Hancock, Issam Harik*, J. John Harris, S. Zafar Hasan*, John Haughton,‘ Christine Ha'Vice, James '
Hertog, James Houghland, Robert Ireland, Jeff Jones, T. A. Jones, Richard Kermode,‘Cra1g>Koontz, Thomas ,
Lester Jonathan Liar, C. Oran Little, Brent Logan, Elizabeth Lorch, Robert Lorch, Martin McMaho‘rt, M.
Pinar Menguc*, David Mohney*, Roy Moore*, Donald Mullineaux*, Jacqueline Noonan, William O' Connor*,
Clayton Paul, Barbara Phillips, Rhoda-Gale Pollack'*, Roy Porter*, Deborah Powell, Thomas Robinson. Ellen
Rosenman, Daniel Rowland, David Shiplcy, David Stockham, Louis Swift*, Phillip Tibbs, Chris Vance, Enid
Waldhart": Carolyn Williams, Eugene Williams. Emery Wilson, H. David Wilson*.

The Chair welcomed everyone to the 1994— .1995 University Senate. Professor Cox stated he was from
the Mathematics Department and he was the Senate Council chair following Dan F-ulks who was a hard act to
follow. He would appreciate any cooperation and help.

Chairman Cox made the following introductions: Susan Caldwell, Recording Secretary; Randall Dahl:
University Registrar and Secretary of the University Senate: Gifford Blyton, a retired faculty member from
Communications who for many years has been the Parliamentarian; and Cindi Todd, the Administration .
Assistant for the Uni Jersity Senate Counei1. Cindi can find anything you need in 13 seconds, so if you have
questions ask Cindi

The Senate Council members are: Chair-elect, Gretchen ‘LaGOdng. NursinggvDan F ulks, Accounting; Ed
Sagan, Education; Enid Waldhart, COmmunieations; Don Frazier, PhySiology; Tom Garrity. Behavioral
Science; Brad Canon, Political Science, and Mike Nietzel, Psychology. The tWo student representatives are
Paige Bendel and Greg T. Watkins. The faculty members of the Board of Trustees, who are non—voting
members are Loys Mather and Deborah Powell, and T. A Jones, who 18 the President of the Student
Govemment.Association and student trustee.

Chairman Cox then stated that technically the President of the University Senate is the President of the
Institution. The President does not preside over the Senate meetings, this is delegated to the Chairman of the ‘
Senate Council. It is traditional that the President of the Institution. address the opening meeting of the
Senate. It was his pleasure to introduce President Charles T. Wethington, the President of are University of

President C11ar1es Wethington was given a round of applause, and made the following remarks:

= '* Absence Explainedt.


 Minutes, University Senate. September 12, 1994

‘ The Changing Image Of The University: One Of Quality
State Of The University Address
President Charles T. Wcthington, Jr.
September 12,1994


If you have been around very long you have heard the words-- "UK Stands Out." We use
themgmpgstly to describe our Institution to the outside world. I like the sound of the words. I
like the message. "UK Stands Out." Simple words that describe both what we are and what
we aspire-to be. And, you know. as I go about the important task of representing the
university in the public arena I find myself increasingly comfortable and confident in claiming
that the University of Kentucky does indeed stand out among institutions of higher education.

I have been a believer in this Institution for quite a long time, as most of you know. But never
have I felt more confident about its future than I feel at this moment. Permit me for just a few
minutes to review only a few of the things that account for my growing confidence in where
we are and where we are going: V

1. In a recent book entitled The Guide to 101 of the Best Values in America's Colleges and
Universities, UK was named as one of the best educational values in the whole country. You
and I have known this fact for quite some time. Still, it is nice to know that impartial observers
are of the same mind. ‘ ‘

2. In yet another recent publication, this one ei-ititled the 100 Best Colleges for African
American Students, a group of impartial evaluators ranked the University of Kentucky among
the very best in the country. We have been working toward this end for quite some time and it
is good to know that we are making progress.

3. In an annual survey done by the news magazine US. News and World Report and recently
announced. the UK College of Medicine was ranked within the top ten comprehensive medical
schools in the United States. It is especially satisfying that this is the fomth consecutive year
that our College of Medicine has achieved this high recognition.

4:. J‘ 2,5,, ; -.
4. In a magazine entitled Modern Health Care, the University of Kentucky hospital was
identified as being among the top 100 hospitals in the United States. As the state and nation
enter a new era of reform in health care, it is particularly gratifying to know that our medical
center is in a position to play a leading role in those important efforts.


5. It is especially pleasing to me to be able to report that for this school year our university
enrolled as new students a total of 82 national merit scholars, an increase of more than 20%
over the prior year and a number that is sure to rank Kentucky among the top ten public
universities in the nation with national merit scholars.


 Minutes, University Senate, September 12, 1994

It is also pleasing to report that the overall quality of our student body continues the
improvement it has shown for most of the last decade. Our median ACT score for this year
reached 24.9 and the grade point averages of our new students reflect no less quality than do
the test scores. Given these facts, it is not surprising that our enrollment numbers on this
campus increase at a time when enrollment in institutions across the country is declining.

6. It is well—known that educational institutions across the county find themselves at this
moment in a very competitive environment for external support of research activities. Yet, the
total dollar value of external awards during the most recent year for research at this university
was almost $102 million a figure never reached before and leaving no doubt that Kentucky
fully deserves its classification as a Carnage I Research Institution. (Parenthetically, I might ,-
add that the University will again upgrade its supercomputer this fall. The convex/hp ,
metasystem scalable parallel computer system that was installed last summer has been running
at capacity providing significantly increased computing capacity for UK researchers. demand
for computing cycles continues to expand rapidly. Therefore, the University will acquire
another scalable parallel computing platform during the fall. The new system will eventually
provide an additional three to four times the computing power currently available. This new
system will enable UK researchers to continue to be in the forefront of computational research
in their disciplines.)

In listing these most notable accomplishments of our institution I barely scratch the surface of

what could be said about recent signs of quality and contribution. For example, I have said
nothing about the national and international recognition given individual members of our
faculty, about the number of Fulbright Scholars we have had, about the exceptional teaching,
research and service records of the faculty andstaff of our Centers and Institutes, about the
impressive group of new faculty hired for the Lexington campus, and nothing about what our
students have achieved in competition with the best students of other institutions-—for example,
the second place finish in national competition of our women Engineering students and the
ranking of our college of Law Student Bar Association among the top three in the country.
But I say nothing on these subjects only because I wish not to belabor my point. I want only
to emphasize that from my position at the center of this big institution I see highly encouraging
signs of quality, achievement, contribution, and excellence. And, more importantly, I see
unmistakable signs of improvement and progress. I see them every day and I see them
everywhere, thanks to the serious efforts and work of our faculty and staff and the best
students the University has ever seen. _ , »

The kind of quality of which 'I speak does not simply fall upon an institution like fog in the
morning. It must be earned. It must be made to happen. And the thought of making
important things happen brings me to what is perhaps the most significant of impending events
for the university as we begin this new year. I am speaking, of course, of our attempt to find a
way to move forward to satisfy our vital need for a new library. - im

As you know, we have been working for more than four years to solve this problem. We have
raised more than $21 million in private contributions for the facility and an endowment for long


 Minutes, University Senate, September 12, 1994

term support of our collection. We have received approval for the project from the governor,
the Council on Higher Education, and the General Assembly. We were authorized in 1992 to
obtain architectural services, which we did, and to prepare the site for construction of the
building. Unfortunately, because of budgetary constraints which are well—known, in 1994 the
General Assembly found itself unable to provide funds for construction of any new buildings in
the commonwealth. And that included the building we had in mind for our new library,
although I can tell you that virtually every list of projects deserving and needing state support
was headed by the one that had come to be known as Commonwealth Library. But the truth
that had to be faced as members of the General Assembly finished their work and adjourned
was that we had no money with which to build our library.

The dust settled and in due course our disappointment faded. But the facts that had pushed us
to urge the General Assembly to support this effort remained:

First: Our existing library facility is plainly inadequate to satisfy the needs of a university of
the quality of the one I described moments ago. Simply put, it is not good enough for a faculty
of the quality of ours. It is not good enough to serve an institution of scholars that does more
than $100 million worth of world class research in a single year. And it is not good enough to
serve the needs of an institution that is able to attract for study a very high number of the best
students our country has to offer.

Second: We had been given more than $21 million in private money for this library, money
that could not be used for any other purpose. Literally thousands (thirteen I believe) of
individuals and entities joined forces to support this worthy cndeavor——faculty, students, staff,
alumni, and friends from all comers of the country. It is important to remember that these
people were asked for support of this project, and gave it, under a promise that we in the
institution would do our utmost to provide for the university and the commonwealth a great
library. It is vitally important, I believe, for the university to do its best to honor this

Third: The passage of time, in this instance, is an enemy of progress. Our inability to obtain
state support for this project could not have come at a worse time. We have gained our stride
in our run toward excellence. We have a momentum in our favor that 1 would hate very much
to see us lose. More specifically, it is very clear that a delay of only two years in moving ahead
with this effort will rob us of the chance to have for our institution 'the kind of library facility
we will need for the 2 1 st century. We have conservatively estimated that a delay of merely
two years would add $3 to $4 million in construction costs to the library and create a need for
redesign of the facility, with a significant loss of needed space and quality. And, needless to
say, we have no assurances at all that the delay we face is one of only two years.

And so, what should we do? Back off, wait, and hope for a better response to our needs in
two, maybe four, years down the road. Or should we push to make it happen, exert greater
effort in an attempt to convert our hopes for a great library into a reality? In struggling with
this difficult issue, I have found in the long history of this university at least some measure of
encouragement. It is interesting to note that the first library ever constructed on this campus
was built by the Carnage Foundation and given to us, built in other words without the benefit


 Minutes, University Senate, September 12, 1994

of state funding. It is also interesting to note that the Margaret 1. King Library was built
during the depression years from the University's own funds, once again without the benefit of
state money.

Well, as you know by now, my decision was to move forward and look for some way to build
this library that the University so vitally needs. We have considered a number of possibilities
and believe that we may have found an approach that has promise. Essentially, it involves a
joint effort of four parties--the University of Kentucky Alumni Association, the University of
Kentucky Athletic Association, the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government, and finally
the University itself. The approach is complicated but generally consists of the following

One: The University, by action of the Board of Trustees, would authorize the UK Alumni
Association to build this facility on the land that we have set aside for this purpose, under a
proviso that would have the Alumni Association giving the building to the university after
construction for use as a library.

Two: The Alumni Association will request the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government
to issue under its authority $41 million in tax exempt revenue bonds for the purpose of
financing construction of the library. The Urban County Government has indicated a
preliminary willingness to respond favorably to this request and will likely have a chance to do
so within a few weeks.

Three: The Alumni Association will enter into an agreement with the University of Kentucky
Athletic Association which will commit the latter to provide annually for a period of thirty
years from its resources sufficient funds for the payment of interest and principal on the bonded
indebtedness incurred by the Alumni Association to provide Funds for the construction of the
building. The University will pick up some costs now being borne by the Athletic Association.
By supporting the library, the support for academic programs that the association has been
providing in recent years will continue and be strengthened.

Four: The Alumni Association will use the fimds generated by the bond issue (along with
approximately $16 million dollars in private donations earmarked for this purpose) to construct
under architectural plans and drawings already in existence the library building, with the
university providing construction, management, accounting, and other services needed to
further the project.

Five: At the end of construction, the Alumni Association will convey by gift to the university
all of its rights and interests in the building, subject of course to the lien of bondholders. The
University will accept the gift and agree to use the building as a library.

There is yet a lot of work to be done before we can move ahead with construction, and a few
hurdles remain to be crossed. But there is good reason to believe that we will be able to begin
construction of the building before year's end. Aside from the building that we so vitally need,
I see nothing but positive results coming from the initiative we have elected to take. To
mention some of the more obvious ones:


 Minutes, University Senate, September 12, 1994

One: I can tell you that the reaction to our determination to move forward with this endeavor
has been overwhelmingly favorable. It is clear that the people of Kentucky want the university
to succeed and it is clear that they support this effort. You can rest assured that I have
consulted widely on this subject and that I have briefed people at several levels of government
concerning our plans and intentions, and I can tell you that no one has uttered words of
discouragement. This is important, for the funding of this library will be structured to
accommodate future state support of this vital institutional need. We will continue to press for
state support of the library, as we have done in the past, and I am confident that in one form or
another we will get the support we need and deserve.

Two: It is my belief that the partnership we have forged in this endeavor will mean a great
deal to the institution long after the library is in place. I have met with leaders of our Alumni
Association and will meet with a larger group of them at the end of this week. And I can tell
you that these important long—range supporters of the institution could hardly be more
delighted than they are at the chance to play a role in solving this problem. And the same is
true. by my impression, of members of the Urban County Government, who clearly see the
university as a community member worthy of the strongest possible support. And, finally, I
believe that there is great value in the effort we have made to encourage our Athletic
Association to continue its recent practice of providing essential financial support for the
academic interests of the University. I am delighted to have in this institution a partnership
that finds athletics and academics working together for the common good of our university.

I have perhaps provided more information on this subject that you might have wanted. But I
want you to be fiilly informed about what we are trying to do. And I want you to be as
supportive of this effort as you can possibly be. I know that we can succeed in this important
endeavor. A measure of sacrifice will be needed for awhile. But that sacrifice will be very
small when measured against the enormous value of having on the campus a library like the
one we have in mind.


We must continue the work we have begun in a number of areas as we look ahead through this
year and beyond. A few things that come quickly to mind include the following:

One: We will need to work harder to maintain the momentum we have for improvement of
the quality of our student body. The Admissions Office, Dr. Joe Fink and his staff, must be
commended for their efforts in this area. But we will have to do better to continue progress on
this critical front. And there is in this work an important role for the faculty to play.

No one can fail to see that the most important relationship in a university is the relationship of
faculty and student. It is this relationship more than anything else that defines the ultimate
impression that students have of our institution. Every student at the university needs to
believe that everyone here, most notably the faculty, wants them to succeed and will do
whatever is necessary to facilitate that objective. While we stimulate students intellectually. we
must never lose sight of the need to treat them with proper respect and dignity. A satisfied


 Minutes, University Senate, September 12, 1994

student is an invaluable commodity for an institution to have in the world of education as it
exists today.

Two: As we look for better students for the university, there is a need to do better with the
students we have. Randy Dahl, University Registrar, recently provided for me important data
concerning the success we have in graduating students who come here to study. You will
recall that we included. in our long range institutional strategies an intent to do better on this
front than we have been doing. In figures that Randy provided, we found ourselves ranked
ninth on a list of benchmark schools and fifth on a list of SEC Schools. There are undoubtedly
many factors involved in the failure of students to complete educational objectives. But at

least to some extent, the failure of a student to succeed is a failure of the institution itself, a
failure that we must learn how to avoid. We can do a lot better to retain and graduate students .
at this university and must make a special effort to do that.

Three: We have worked hard for quite some time to add to the diversity of the faculty,
students. and staff of this institution. We have made progress of which I am proud but we
have work still to be done. In 1992, the general assembly put this university and other state
institutions as well under pressure to move forward with equal opportunity initiatives. We
were required by the Council on Higher Education regulation to show as a measure of success
a 20% improvement on several measurements each year for a period of five years. As you may
recall from media coverage of this subject, we have not achieved the level of success required
to satisfy the state's demanding standards. But we have made substantial progress and are
positioned to do even better. In 1987 the percentage of entering resident students that was
African American was 3.4%; in 1990, that percentage had improved to 4.9% and in 1992 had
improved to 5.2%. In 1987, the faculty of the Lexington campus included 15 African
Americans; for the school year 1993-94, that figure had increased to 52. Special efforts are
needed for progress such as this. We are committed to doing whatever must be done to assure
that equal opportunity for all is available at the University of Kentucky.

Four: Financial support for higher education is not likely to improve substantially in the near
future. Competing needs for public resources continue to make it difficult for proponents of
higher education. We used newly appropriated funds from the most recent budget round
primarily to support our work force. We received an increase of 3% in our state allocation and
used that principally for salary increases. We used a small part of that increase to take another
step toward equalizing the institution's contribution toward staff retirement. Beginning in July,
the university will contribute 9.25% of staff salaries to retirement benefits, bringing this
contribution closer to the 10% paid for retirement of faculty. We made a small adjustment to

, the salaries of our lowest paid employees in an effort to work toward equitable compensation
for all of our employees. We will have to continue to use our resources carefully and
effectively, to be creative in our operations, and to continue our efforts to restructure our
organization when opportunities arise. We will have to work even harder to generate external
support for our research efforts and we must continue to build upon an extremely successful
effort to provide private funds for the support of our work.

We will, as a university, continue to restructure as appropriate. You may recall that the
consultants on the administrative structure of the university recommended as opportunities


 Minutes, University Senate, September 12, 1994

permit, to slim down the titles, salaries and/or powers of some of the vice presidential
positions. With the early retirement of Dr. Clapp, l have done just that and you have received
that information.

Five: External forces are creating pressure for change in several areas. The one general
expectation is that cost be contained. But, as you know, there are other expectations from
constituents. I am concerned about the image we portray to our multiple publics. They must
know that every effort made on behalf of this university is rooted in the core mission of
teaching, research and service. Our strategic plan, which was developed by faculty, staff and
students and approved by our Board of Trustees, focuses on what is important in this
university. We are held accountable in terms of what we do. Our priorities must be in keeping
with our mission and our strategic plan. We must focus on our clients, the students and others
we are expected to serve because of our mission. Every person who has a role in this
university must be clear about the mission and how what he/she does contributes to it.

I conclude my remarks as I began. I feel very good about what we are doing to enhance the
standing of this university. I believe sincerely that the University of Kentucky does in fact
stand out as an institution of higher learning. In the midst of building an institution of
exceptional quality, we have made at least sufficient progress to know that we can succeed in
this great endeavor. To be sure, we are not yet finished with our work. But we have charted
the right course. We are on the right path. And if we continue as faculty, staff, and students
to give the good effort, in good time and in due course we will reach our destination. Of this I

am sure.

After his remarks the President was again given around of applause.

Chairman Cox thanked President Wethington for his remarks.

The Chair then introduced the two sargeants at arms, Jacqueline Hager and Michelle Sohner.

Chairman Cox stated that during the summer the Senate Council had supported several changes in
the administrative regulations. The first was in Administrative Regulations 2-1.0—10 which concerns the
recruitment selection of faculty, the change was to make more explicit the steps in terms of advertising
and putting together faculty committees that are suppose to be taken when faculty are recruited and

hired. 8 0 Ll. N, Gt

The second ch ge in administration regulations concerns the reporting of the missions and centers.
They endorsed the owlin ornmittee report whereby the centers and institutes which have academic
programs now report to the Dean of the Graduate School, Dan Reedy, and then to the respective

sectors where they reside. Three centers will be reporting to the Medical School sector and two will
report to Dr. Hemcnway.

The Senate Council gave endorsement to a proposal which changes the faculty performance review
period from a calendar year to a fiscal year.


 Minutes, University Senate, September 12. 1994

For the past several month the minutes of the University Senate have been on View. Hard copies
will be supplied to anyone who requests them.

The Senate Council has three ad hoe committees which are currently at work. One is on retirement
chaired by Ched Holmquist. another is an ad hoc committee on women. chaired by Carolyn Bratt from
the Law School. There is a third ad hoc committee on minorities which does not yet have a

The updated version of the University Senate Rules are now available on View.

Chairman Cox then recognized Professor Karen Mingst from the Political Science Department to
present a memorial resolution. -

Memorial Resolution

William E. Lyons

William E. (Bill) Lyons died of lung cancer on May 20, 1994, at age 59. He grew up and
was educated in Pennsylvania, receiving his Ph. D. in Political Science from Penn State in
1965. He came to Kentucky in 1967.

Most of you knew Bill and some of you knew him quite well. He was chair of the Senate
Council in 1986-87. More recently he served another term on the council that ended just last
January. In between Council terms. he served on various Senate committees and was one of
the faculty representatives on the I989 Presidential Search Committee.

Bill was devoted to improving the University of Kentucky. Besides his Senate activities,
he served as chair of the Political Science Department. At his death he was the Director of
UK's Martin School of Public Policy and Administration. He also served the university on a lot
of other important and not so important committees.

He also put his academic skills at the service of his community. Indeed, Bill can justly be
termed the James Madison of Lexington. In the early I970s he was a leader in the movement
to merge the governments of Lexington and Fayette County. He chaired and served as
executive director of the merger commission and was largely responsible for drafting the
charter of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government. He subsequently served two
terms on the Urban County Council (winning once by seven votes and becoming known as
"Landslide Lyons"). He won considerable renown because of his experience and success at
merger and often served as a consultant to cities around the nation that were considering
consolidation or merger.

We recall Bill as one of the most rational and analytical persons we knew when it came to
critiquing research'or handling department and university problems. He had both the capacity
and the willingness to think a matter through to its end. He was starkly honest. He did not
delude himself into believing that the cavalry would come charging over the hill with


 Minutes, University Senate, September 12, 1994

saddlebags full of money at the last minute or that we could cross a nonexistent bridge when
we came to it. He bluntly told us: if we want X, we need to do this and if we want Y, we
need to do that and if we don't do either, Z will happen. Beyond that, one of Bill's great
contributions was that he asked questions that needed to be asked. Sometimes he would be
satisfied with the answers, sometimes not. He was not afraid to dissent.

Bill's logic was Aristotelian, but it was more. He had an excellent sense of what was
going on in the real world. He knew what would fly and what wouldn't, and what might if we
worked at it. He was sharply aware of academic and political trends, of what was on people's
agendas and what was not, and how emerging political trends and technological changes would
shape the future. This, of course, is the mark of a leader and is what made his leadership and
counsel so valuable to us all.


 Minutes, University Senate, September 12, 1994

Bill was also a scholar of some renown in the urban politics field. He published two
books, one on the Lexington merger eXperience and one assessing the politics of dissatisfaction
with urban services in America. He also wrote or co-authored over a dozen articles in first
rate journals and many others of a more applied nature. Bill never waivered in his devotion to
competence and quality in the academic enterprise. He opposed programs and courses that
lacked rigor or did not require students