xt7hdr2p8q5j https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7hdr2p8q5j/data/mets.xml University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate Kentucky University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate 1989-02-13  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, February 13, 1989 text University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, February 13, 1989 1989 1989-02-13 2020 true xt7hdr2p8q5j section xt7hdr2p8q5j LHMVERSHY OF KENTUCKY



1 February 1989

Members, University Senate

The University Senate will meet in regular session on Monday,
February 13, 1989, at 3:00 p.m. in ROOM 115 of the Nursing Building


Minutes, 14 November 1988.



Action Items

a. Honorary Degree Candidates: presented by William Markesbery.

b. Proposal to change the graduate admissions standards in the

College of Nursing (circulated under date of 26 January

Proposal to revise graduate admissions requirements in
Electrical Engineering and Mining Engineering (circulated
under date of 30 January 1989).

Proposal to revise Section I - 4.0 (paragraph 7) of the

University Senate Rules relative to the annual faculty
survey (circulated under date of 31 January 1989).

Randall Dahl

If you are unable to attend this meeting, please contact Ms.
Martha Sutton (7—7155) in advance. Thank you.




The University Senate met in regular session at 3:00 p.m., Monday,
February l3, l989, in room 115 of the Health Sciences Building.

Loys Mather, Chairman of the Senate Council, presided.

Members absent were: Troy Abner, Charles T. Ambrose, Richard Angelo*,
Michael Baer, Mark C. Berger, Frank C. Bickel*, David Bingham, Dan A. Black*,
William H. Blackburn, Wilford A. Bladen, Glenn C. Blomquist*, James Boling*,
Peter P. Bosomworth, Earl Bowen, Ray M. Bowen, Carolyn S. Bratt*, Glen
Buckner*, Mark Burger*, Keith Byers, Joan C. Callahan*, Rutheford B Campbell,
Jr., Tim Cansler, Ben Carr, Edward A. Carter, Jordan L. Cohen, Frederick
Danner, Leo S. Demski*, Richard C. Domek, Jr.*, J. Burton Douglass, Jr., Paul
M. Eakin*, Mary Ellen Edmondson*, Joseph Elias, Walter C. Foreman, Michael
Fraley, James Freeman*, Richard Furst, Thomas C. Gray, John R. Groves,
Ottfried J. Hahn, Pat Hart, Zafar Hasan*, Eric Headley, Roger W. Hemken*,
Ronald Hoover, John J. Just, Edward J. Kasarskis*, Richard I. Kermode*, Lisa
King, Doug Kramer, Kenneth K. Kubota*, James M. Kuder*, William B. Lacy,
7erald Lemons*, Linda Levstik, Thomas Lindlof*, C. Oran Little, Paul
Mandelstam*, James R. Marsden*, Geraldine Maschio, Marcus T. McEllistrem,
Ernest Middleton, George Mitchell, Donell Nunez, Dennis T. Officer, Jose
Oubrerie, Alan Perreiah, John J. Piecoro, Jr.*, Deborah E. Powell, Mary Ann
Quarles, Thomas C. Robinson, JoAnn Rogers*, Edgar L. Sagan, Kathryn Sallee,
Louis J. Swift, Manuel Tipgos*, Marie Vittetoe, Jesse L. Weil*, James H.
Wells, Charles T. Wethington, Carolyn A Williams*, Eugene Williams, Constance'
P.-Wilson*, Emery A. Wilson, and Mary L. Witt.

The Minutes of the meeting of November l4, 1988, were approved as

Chairman Loys Mather made the following announcements:

The Senate approved two new degree programs last October. We
have received word that those programs have been approved by the
Council on Higher Education. The degree programs are: Masters in
Health Administration and the Ph.D. in Nutritional Sciences.

Results of the first election ballot for a faculty trustee are
now official. The three persons who received the largest number of
votes are as follows: Ray Betts, College of Arts and Sciences (2l7
votes); Wilbur Frye, College of Agriculture (l96 votes), and Bill
Lyons, College of Arts and Sciences (l25 votes). The names of these
three people will be on the second election ballot which you will be
receiving within a few days. Given the important role that the
faculty trustees play on the Board of Trustees, I think it is
important that all of us participate in the process. Also as
senators, it is important that you go back to your departments and
encourage your colleagues to vote in this next round of the election.

*Absence explained.


 Fina11y, I have been asked to remind you about a seminar on
Inte11ectua1 Properties on February 15 from 12:00 noon unti1 1:30
p.m. in 137 Chemistry—Physics Bui1ding.

The Chair recognized Mr. James Rose, President of the Student Government
Association, who wanted to make an announcement regarding the University Ba11.

Mr. Rose's remarks foTTow:

I just want to Tet you know a 1itt1e more about "ExceTSior", a
campus—wide forma1 that the Student Government, in conjunction with a
1ot of other student organizations, is putting on. The idea behind
this is two-fo1d. One concerns the traditions of this institution.
This is aiso for the facu1ty, the administration, the a1umni and a11
the peop1e that make up the University community. We hope that this
can be something that is successfu1 on our campus and can rea11y
bring together our community. The second thing is for do11ars. Ne
a1ready have one contribution of about $100 from one person. We are
encouraging that. We are getting other contributions and a11 that
money wi11 go direct1y for schoTarships.

The dance wi11 be at 8:00 p.m. We are going to have disp1ays of
different academic c011eges there portraying what they are doing. A
Tot of times students don't see what different coTTeges are doing. A
Tot of times the facu1ty members don't see what other co11eges are

We are going to try to make it a b1ack-tie affair this year. We
wi11 not c1ose the door and wi11 a11ow anyone to come in. Tickets
can be purchased at the Student Center Ticket Office. I appreciate
your support. I hope you wi11 100k at this as a Tong—range event.

The Chairman thanked Mr. Rose.

Chairman Mather recognized Professor Dan Fu1ks (Business and Economics)
an announcement.

Professor Fu1ks remarks f011ow:

I wou1d 1ike to take just a few minutes to hopefu11y te11 you
what you a1ready know about Honors Day 1989. Last year's event was
such a tremendous success in everybody's mind that we decided to make
a few changes this year, one of which is in the program itseTf. The
C011ege of Communications and the Sch001 of Journa1ism have
graciousTy agreed to combine this year's program with the annua1
Creason Lecture. Our guest wi11 be Dan Rather, and we are certain
that.the combined events wi11 be very exciting. The date is a 1itt1e
Tater, Apri1 28 at 3:00 in the afternoon. We ask for your support in
severa1 ways. First, p1ease be sure and mark your ca1endars and p1an
to attend. Second, encourage your cohorts to attend. Third, we
wou1d 1ike an opportunity to speak to any co11ege facu1ty meetings
you may have between now and Apri1 28. Ne wou1d 1ike to send a
representative from the committee over to encourage facu1ty to
attend. Fina11y, we wou1d 1ike your input. For those of you who


 were at the program last year, if you have some suggestions for
changes, please call me at the College of Business or Ann Garrity in
the Chancellor's Office and let us know what you think. Also, please
take a look at the awards that were recognized last year. If
anything should be added to the program or deleted, please let us
know. We feel this is a grand day for the University, as we are
celebrating academic excellence, and we appreciate your support.
Again, that is April 28. Thank you.

The Chairman thanked Professor Fulks.
In further remarks the Chairman stated:

I have mentioned to you before that the President has tried to
keep the Senate Council informed regarding the process of the NCAA
investigation of the UK Basketball Program. He has met with
representatives of the Council and with the full Council. Also, he
met once with the Council in an executive session. We feel he is
doing a good job in trying to keep us informed of that situation.
The Council has been very pleased with the manner in which the
Administration has handled this investigation. We have sent him a
resolution to that effect last August and again in January. I would
like to read to you the resolution that we sent to him last month.
The resolution follows:

”The Senate Council commends President Roselle for the
responsible and professional manner in which he has handled the NCAA
investigation of the University of Kentucky basketball program. The

decision to conduct a complete and independent investigation of the
allegations made by the NCAA is consistent with protecting the
primacy of the academic mission of the University while nurturing and
promoting a quality program of inter-collegiate athletics. Equally
important, the President's dedication to pursuing the truth in this
matter while strengthening the integrity and reputation of the
University has the unqualified support of the Senate Council. We are
confident that the University of Kentucky and its tradition of
excellence in basketball will be best served by continuing this

The President indicated to us that he was appreciative of the
support from the faculty, not only through this resolution but also
from the large number of letters that he has received from individual
' faculty members. He asked that I convey that to you. He also wants
you to understand that the reaction of the Board of Trustees to that
report was very favorable as well as their reaction to the process
through which the University conducted the investigation.

We have a number of items that will be coming before the Senate
during March and April. In that connection we have adjusted the
spring meeting schedule slightly. I would like for you to make note
of that. First, in two weeks from today, February 27, we are calling
a special meeting of the Senate at which time the President will be
with us to talk to us and respond to your questions concerning the
University budget. Our next scheduled meeting was March 6. Given


 the workloads that members of the committees have taken on and some
items that will be before this body during the spring, we are
postponing the March 6 meeting until March 20. Please make note of
that. We are hoping by doing this, it will free up the backlog that
is likely to result at the April meeting. The April meeting will be
the second Monday in April as scheduled.

The Chair recognized Professor Arthur Nonneman for a Memorial Resolution.

Jesse Graham Harris, Jr.

Today, with wildly varied emotions, we shall recall the life and
death of Jesse G. Harris, Jr., Professor of Psychology, College of
Arts and Sciences, University of Kentucky. It is with gratitude and
affection that we recall his many years of selfless devotion to the
University of Kentucky, to the Department of Psychology, to the
profession of psychology, and to his students and colleagues. It is
with confusion, pain, and a tremendous sense of loss that we recall
his death, at his own hand, on November 22, l988. At the time of his
death he was on sabbatical leave from the University, having
completed his third fouriyear term as Chairperson of the Department
of Psychology (l963-67, l980-84) on June 31, 1988.

Dr. Harris had a truly distinguished academic and professional
career. As an undergraduate at Harvard University he was elected to
Phi Beta Kappa in l946, and as a graduate student at Duke University
he was elected to Sigma Xi in l953. He received the A.B. degree from
Harvard in Biochemical Sciences in l946 and the Ph.D. from Duke in
Clinical Psychology in l955. He then served as an active duty
commissioned officer in the U.S. Navy Medical Service Corp from
l955—l958, receiving a commendation from the Naval School of Aviation
Medicine, Pensacola, Florida, in 1958. He remained active in the
U.S. Naval Reserve, Medical Service Corps, until l986, when he
retired at the rank of Captain.

After two years as Assistant Professor of Psychology at the
University of Connecticut (l958-60), Dr. Harris came to the
University of Kentucky in l960 as Associate Professor and Director of
Clinical Psychology Training in the Department of Psychiatry of the
new A. B. Chandler Medical Center. In l963 he was promoted to the
rank of Professor and was appointed Chairman of the Department of
Psychology. His major research interests included the structure of
personality, clinical assessment, the validity of projective tests,
and schizophrenia. Throughout his career at the University of
Kentucky Jesse committed considerable energy to the development of
the Clinical Psychology Doctoral Program. He obtained one of the
first NIMH Training Grants awarded for clinical psychology training,
he was instrumental in the creation of our Psychological Services
Center, he taught a series of courses in psychopathology,
personality, assessment, and projective techniques that constitute
the heart of our doctoral curriculum in clinical psychology, and he


 continued active clinical supervision of graduate students. In
addition, Jesse Harris served as the director of 39 doctoral
dissertations, and many of his former students are now recognized as
major figures in clinical psychology and neuropsychology.

Within the university community at large Dr. Harris was widely
recognized and respected for the unique combination of abilities and
personal qualities that he embodied. He could be doggedly tenacious
in pursuing solutions to those problems that concerned him most
deeply, but he was a gentleman in every sense of the word, and he
demonstrated the highest integrity in every aspect of his personal
and professional life. A partial listing of the College and
University committees that he chaired includes: University Council on
Experiential Education (l973-74), University Academic Area Advisory
Committee for the Social Sciences (1975—76), Institutional Review
Board for the Nonmedical Sciences (l972-74, 1982-84), College of Arts
and Sciences Faculty Council (1978—79), Senate Committee on Academic
Organization and Structure of the University (1977—79), Senate
Committee on Revision of Governing Regulations Relating to Review of
Academic Units (1986-87), Phi Beta Kappa Scholarship Committee


Throughout his career Dr. Harris received numerous awards and
honors from the profession of psychology. In 1965 he was elected a
Fellow of the American Psychological Association, Division l2, and he
was a Diplomate in Clinical Psychology for the American Board of
Examiners in Professional Psychology. In I963 he was appointed by
the Governor of the Commonwealth of Kentucky to the Mental Health
Manpower Commission, and he served for five years as Chairperson of
Kentucky Manpower Development, Inc. He also served for five years as
Chairperson for the Board of Psychology. In l979 he was elected
President of the Kentucky Psychological Association, and in 1983 the
Association awarded him its Distinguished Service Award.

The death of Jesse G. Harris, Jr. has left a void for all of us
who knew him and worked with him. He was always available for anyone
who might need his encouragement, his guidance, his wisdom. He
fostered in us a spirit of cooperation, mutual respect and support.
We are better for having known him, and the University of Kentucky is
a better place for his having served here.

Dr. Harris is survived by his wife Julia Patricia McNamee Harris
(Pat), two daughters, Julia Kathleen Harris Miller and Cecelia Ann
Harris Johnson, and a grandson, Jeffrey Alan Miller.

Professor Nonneman respectfully requested that the Memorial Resolution be
placed as a permanent part of the Minutes for this meeting and that copies be
provided for Dr. Harris' widow.

The Chair asked the Senate to rise for a moment of silent tribute.

The Chair recognized Professor William Marksberry, Chairman of the Honorary
Degree Committee, and a member of the College of Medicine. The Chairman
reminded the Senate that the action taken at the meeting on the Honorary


 Degrees was not a final action. He stated that it was simply a part of a
lengthy process and action on the candidates is not final until it is acted
upon by the Board of Trustees. He stated that the information which Dr.
Marksberry provided, the names he suggested, was not public information. The
Chairman asked that all in attendance adhere to this and hold the information
in the strictest of confidence and if anyone felt they could not, that they
should excuse themselves.

Jay Blanton, Editor of the Kentucky Kernel, wanted to know under what
grounds the information was not public information. The Chair stated it was
not public information because it was simply a recommendation on personnel that
the Senate would be recommending to the Board of Trustees. Mr. Blanton stated
that he wanted to place a formal objection to the University Senate. He read
the following statement:

The exemptions of the Kentucky Open Meetings law are clearly
stated and defined.

Meetings may be closed when the subject matter includes
'discussion or hearings which might lead to the appointment,
dismissal or disciplining of an individual employee, member or
student. (General personnel matters may not be discussed in

The Kentucky Kernel and its legal counsel believe that
recommendations concerning the conferring of honorary degrees are in
no way covered by the personnel exemption in the state Open Meetings

Therefore, we see no legal basis for the University Senate to
close its regularly scheduled meeting today, February 13, l989. We
formally object to any attempt to do so.

Mr. Blanton stated that if the meeting was going to be closed there would
have to be a formal motion placed as well as a vote by the University Senate
to close the meeting. Chairman Mather noted that he did not say the meeting
was closed but only that he wanted to keep the names of the individuals in
confidence. He also reminded Mr. Blanton of a quote from the Supreme Court‘s
opinion concerning the Open Meetings law when they said: "when matters dealing
with individuals are to be discussed, the meeting may be closed in the manner
provided by KRS 6l.815.” Mr. Blanton said that he would still like to object
and that his objection be placed on record. He did not want the information
concerning Honorary Degrees to be kept in confidence.

The Chair left it to the Senate as to whether or not to keep the
information confidential. Professor Hans Gesund (Engineering) moved to close
the meeting for the purpose of discussing matters which might lead to the
conferring of degrees on certain individuals. The motion was seconded. The
Chair again asked Mr. Blanton if he was willing to abide by the suggestion he
made of keeping the names of the nominees in confidence. Mr. Blanton stated
he was not willing to do that. Professor Gesund moved the previous question.
Professor Daniel Reedy (Dean of the Graduate School) asked for a point of
information. He wanted to know if the motion could be made to close the
meeting for simply an action of the Senate without reference to the


 legislation. Professor Gesund stated it was under the law and it was a
personnel matter. There was no further discussion, and the motion passed in a
voice vote. Those who were not members of the Senate left the meeting.

The Chairman recognized Professor Marksberry who read the biographical
information on six nominees for the Senate's consideration. Following Dr.
Marksberry's presentation the Chair stated that the candidates could be
discussed in the executive session but no vote could be taken. There was no
discussion and the Chair declared the meeting open. He told the
Sergeant—at-arms to tell anyone waiting that the Senate was in open session.

Professor William Lyons (Arts and Sciences) moved to endorse the
recommendation of the committee. The motion was seconded and unanimously

The Chair stated there was a member of the Senate present who had been a
member for many terms and that was Professor James Kemp (Agriculture). He
added that Professor Kemp had served on the Senate Council a number of times
over the last few decades. He served as Chairman of the Senate Council, as a
faculty representative on the Board of Trustees, and served in many other
capacities at the University. He served with distinction both to this
University and to his profession. The Chair stated this was Professor Kemp's
last Senate meeting because he is retiring February 28. The Senate joined the
Chairman in an appropriate round of thanks.

Chairman Mather recognized Professor Donald Leigh, Chair-elect of the
Senate Council, for action item (h) on the agenda. Professor Leigh, on behalf
of the Senate Council, moved approval of the proposal to change the graduate
admissions standards in the College of Nursing. He stated that the proposed
changes would permit needed flexibility for nursing students. This proposal
was circulated to members of the Senate under date of 26 January 1989.

The Chair noted that motions from the Senate Council required no second.
There was no discussion, and the motion unanimously carried in a voice vote.
The proposal reads as follows:

Current: ' Proposed:

l. Undergraduate grade point average No change.
of 2.5 on a 4.0 grading scale.

Combined score of 800 on the No change
verbal and quantitative portions
of the GRE

A baccalaureate degree in No change
nursing from a NLN accredited

Minimum of one year post- One year post-baccalaureate
baccalaureate experience in clinical experience (pre-
nursing requisite to clinical courses)


 5. Licensure to practice nursing in Eligible for Kentucky
at least one of the United States licensure as a registered nurse
(Kentucky license prerequisite
to clinical practicum).

Evidence of being prepared in
physical and health assessment

Background and Rationale:

The proposed changes in the standards for admission to the M.S.
program in Nursing were made as a result of a self—study conducted
for the site visit of the National League for Nursing accreditation
in the Fall of l986. (Attendant curricular revisions were proposed
and approved by the University Senate: l2/8/88).


The proposed changes permit needed flexibility for nursing
students. Items #4 and #5 allow students to begin their academic
courses without finishing up the requisite experiences and
licensing prerequisites, but insure that they will have both by the
time they begin the clinical part of their education. Change #6
simply formalizes a strengthening of the program that is now in

"Implementation Date: Fall Semester, l989.

The Chair recognized Professor Leigh for agenda item (c). Professor
Leigh, on behalf of the Senate Council, moved to approve the proposal to
revise graduate admissions requirements in Electrical Engineering and Mining
Engineering. He presented the proposals separately. The proposal was
circulated to members of the Senate under date of 30 January l989. The motion
did not require a second. There was no discussion on the graduate admissions
requirements in Electrical Engineering. The motion unanimously'carried.
Professor Leigh presented the second part of the proposal to revise graduate
admissions requirements in Mining Engineering. There was no discussion. The
motion unanimously carried and both parts of the proposal read as follows:

l. Proposal to revise graduate admissions requirements in
Electrical Engineering for Students without a BSEE degree


lhe graduate student applicant who does not have a BSEE degree
from an ABET accredited Electrical Engineering program should

develop competence and demonstrate ability in the fundamental

of electrical engineering.

Before being admitted to full graduate standing or as a
candidate for the Master's or Doctor's degree, a fundamental
background in Electrical Engineering should be acquired by


 non-EE degree holders. The background should be demonstrated
by meeting one of the three criteria formulated below.

Enroll in and satisfactorily pass the following EE core courses
with a minimum C grade, while also maintaining an overall B

a. EE 2ll/221/222; and
. EE 420/461/467/480; and
c. EE 47l or EE 4l5 or EE 468; or

Satisfactorily pass the final examination in the above 400
level courses with a grade of B or better and demonstrate
laboratory proficiency; or

Demonstrate, by an academic transcript, that the student has
taken and satisfactorily passed an e uivalent scientific or
engineering course in his undergraduate major area to offset
the core course requirement. For instance a computer science
major might not be required to take EE 480; a physics major
may be exempt from EE 467; a math major exempt from EE 420.

The specific background requirements for an individual student
will be set forth in a fonnal letter of transmittal from the
Director of Graduate Studies; a copy, with the student's

signed concurrence, will be placed in the student's record file.

Exemptions from any specific requirements and the approval of
specific entrance criteria for a non—EE technical student will
be authorized by the Director of Graduate Studies. The
Director of Graduate Studies will issue the formal letter
referred to above.


a. A student from a non—accredited EE program, especially
those from foreign countries, might satisfy these criteria
by showing an appropriate transcript.

The background criteria conditions above are in addition
to courses allowed toward the MSEE degree. Over and above
these qualifying criteria are the 24 credit hours plus
thesis under Plan A or 30 credit hours lus one semester's
3 hour registration in EE 783 as a spec1a| project under
Plan B.


lhose students without a BSEE degree must now satisfactorily
complete a set of specified remedial courses consisting of EE
undergraduate required courses (EE 2ll, 22l, 222, 4l5, 420,
46l, 462, 480/280, 467/468, 380) and two 500 level EE elective
courses before regular admission to the graduate program will
be granted. The Director of Graduate Studies may approve
substitutions from previous scientific or engineering work in
related areas on a course for course basis.


 Background and Rationale:

The proposed changes increase the number of courses students
without a BSEE degree must fulfill before being admitted to the
graduate program. These added courses are intended to correct
weaknesses the faculty has noted in such students under the old
admission rules.


The proposed changes have been approved by the Graduate
Council, the Graduate Faculty, the Senate Committee on
Admissions and Academic Standards and the Senate Council.

Proposal to revise graduate admissions requirements in

Mining Engineering



In addition to satisfying general Graduate School and College
of Engineering admissions requirements (a GPA of 2.8/4.0 on all
undergraduate work is normally required), applicants for _
admission to the M.S. Min.E., and the Ph.D. degree programs in
mining engineering must have been awarded a Bachelor of Science
degree from an engineering program accredited by the
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology.


In addition to satisfying general Graduate School and College
of Engineering admissions requirements (a GPA of 2.8/4.0 on all
undergraduate work is normally required), applicants for
admission to the M.S. Min.E., and the Ph.D. degree programs in
mining engineering must have been awarded the Bachelor of
Science degree prior to admission to graduate degree status.
Normally, it is expected that applicants will have graduated
from an engineering program accredited by the Engineering
Accreditation Commission (EAC) of the Accreditation Board for
Engineering and Technology (ABET). For applicants from
non-U.S. universities, from related but non-engineering
disciplines, and from institutions that do not have accredited
engineering programs, an assessment will be made of the
comparability of educational background to that prescribed, and
appropriate remedial coursework established as a provision for

Background and Rationale:

Current requirements Fer graduate student admission in mining
engineering contain language that is unduly restrictive——
excluding all applicants from abroad and from related
scientific disciplines. The proposed change in language will
allow Mining Engineering to admit non-traditional students,
applicants from non—U.S. universities, from non—engineering
disciplines, and from institutions that do not have accredited
engineering programs--after careful screening and remedial work
as necessary in each student's case.



 The proposed changes have been approved by the Graduate
Council, the Graduate Faculty, the Senate Committee on
Admissions and Academic Standards and the Senate Council.

The Chair recognized Professor Donald Leigh for item (d), the last item on
the agenda. Professor Leigh, on behalf of the Senate Council, moved approval
of the proposal to revise Section I — 4.0 (paragraph 7) of the University
Senate Rules relative to the annual faculty survey. Professor Eeigh stated
that the item concerned the annual faculty survey that the present Senate
Rules require. The new part of the proposal would be that an ad hoc committee
of properly qualified professionals shall be appointed by the SEhEtE Council
to survey a random sample of the faculty in the spring of each even numbered
year. This proposal was circulated to members of the Senate 3l January l989.

The Chair noted again that the recommendations from the Senate Council
required no second. The floor was opened for discussion. Professor Bradley
Canon (Political Science) wanted to know if the ad hoc committee of qualified
professionals would limit the committee to people—wha—are familiar with random
sampling. Chairman Mather did not interpret the statement to entirely
limiting the committee to that group. He felt the understanding was there
would be someone on the committee that would understand sampling.

There were no further questions. Motion unanimously carried in a voice
vote and reads as follows:

Proposal: (Underlined portion is new; bracketed portion is

- to be deleted)

I 4.0 An ad hoc committee of properly qualified professionals
shall be appointed by the Senate Council {shallj to
survey a random sample of the [entire] faculty in the
spring of each even numbered year to identify the most
pressing issues faCing the University during the coming
year. The Senate Council shall evaluate the issues and,
where appropriate, assign them to standing committees.
Any significant issue not within the jurisdiction of
one of the standing committees shall be referred to an
ad hoc committee appointed by the Senate Council.
Standing and ad hoc Committees of the Senate shall have
the privilege of_presenting reports to that body after
review by the Senate Council provided the report has
been appropriately circulated in advance.




As a part of its report to the Senate Council in April 1988,
the ad hoc Senate Survey committee recommended consideration of
alternative methods for surveying the faculty. Present rules
require the Senate Council to survey the entire faculty on an
annual basis. Survey organizations have found small, appro—
priately selected samples, whose members can be vigorously
pursued, can yield more useful information than large popula—


 tions for whom reminders and tracking are financially and
logistically difficult. In addition, it is not clear that
annual surveys undertaken to fulfill an official rule (which
has been ignored by some Councils) will yield new and useful
information. Further, it is unlikely that general faculty
attitudes will undergo radical changes from one year to the

This proposal would allow the Council greater flexibility in
timing and sample groups as well as added capability to focus
on specific issues---while at the same time providing assurance
that faculty opinion will be solicited.

The Chairman reminded the senators of the special meeting with the
President On February 27 and the regular Senate meeting on March 20.

There being