|
University Archives of Virginia Tech |
Virginia Tech
Governance Minutes ArchiveApril 25, 1991
Minutes University Council Meeting April 25, 1991 Dr. James D. McComas called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. Present:J. McComas, R. Smoot, E.F. Carlisle, J. Hillison, T. Goodale, Doug McAlister (for C. Steger), P. Gherman, L. Harris, G. Hooper, Erv Blythe (for R. Heterick), Robert Paterson (for H. Doswald), J. Nichols, R. Sorensen, Dianne Robertshaw (for J. Buffer), Jim Marchman (for G.W. Clough), L. Moore, D. Hewitt, F. Thye, L. Rees, L. Geyer, N. Eiss, D. Kingston, C. Carrig, J. Crittenden, N. Marriott, Ludeman Eng (for S. Batie), A. Snoke, L. Barroso, Anthony Townsend (for D. Adams), C. Vargo, M. Byrne, K. Mottley, P. Larkin Guests: Bill Burleson, Spectrum; Charles Stott, CSAC; Russ Cole, CSAC; Sheri McConnell, CSAC; Clara Cox, CSAC; Randy Grayson, PPWS; Rita Purdy, CUS; Kennith Martin, Exten- sion Faculty Association; Charles Pinder, Black Caucus; Dixon Hanna, CAUS; Norrine Bailey Spencer, CUS; Cornel N. Morton, Office of EO/AA Absent: C. Forbes, M. Ridenour, S.J. Ritchey, P. Eyre, A.J. Davis, R. Small, R.A. Heller, D. Adams, P. Radcliffe 1. ADOPTION OF AGENDA A motion was made and seconded to approve the agenda as distributed. The motion PASSED. 2. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MINUTES OF APRIL 11, 1991 The University Council minutes of the meeting of April 11, 1991 were approved as submitted. 3. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 1991 The University Council minutes of the meeting of April 15, 1991 were approved with modifications to 1) Dr. Marriott's discussion of the estab- lishment of an Academy of Public Service Excellence, and 2) Dr. Snoke's description of the minimum TOEFL requirements for international students. 4. FOR INFORMATION a. Report on SCHEV's recommendations for new graduate degree programs. As background information, Dr. Hooper described to Council the four decisions that SCHEV can render when evaluating new graduate study proposals. He stated that SCHEV can 1) encourage further development of the proposal, 2) endorse it, 3) approve it, or 4) deny it. Dr. Hooper then announced SCHEV's recommendations for several specific program proposals, as follows: o Endorsed the M.A. in Hotel, Restaurant and Institutional Management o Denied the Ph.D. in Hotel, Restaurant and Institutional Management o Endorsed the M.A. in Spanish Studies o Denied the Ph.D. in Exercise Physiology o Endorsed the M.A. in Philosophy o Encouraged the Ph.D. in Political Science o Endorsed the M.A. in Music He elaborated that denied program requests can be reevaluated after two years, while "endorsed" program proposals are fine-tuned (usually involving financial considerations) until approved by SCHEV at one of its monthly meetings. He advised Council members that the sponsoring departments receive detailed feedback from SCHEV on proposals as does the Provost's Office. Those interested can contact him for specific details concerning the programmatic decisions noted above. 5. IN SUCCESSIVE MOTIONS, COUNCIL APPROVED THE MINUTES OF THE FOLLOWING MEETINGS. a. Commission on Research, March 27, 1991. In reference to the discussion of special faculty research appoint- ments, Dr. Hooper informed Council that the language of that resolution is not yet final and is now under review by the Commission on Faculty Affairs. 6. SECOND READING, STUDENT GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION CONSTITUTION. FIRST READING, APRIL 15, 1991. Ms. Byrne moved adoption of the SGA Constitution. The SGA Constitution was APPROVED. 7. SECOND READING, COMMISSION ON GRADUATE STUDIES AND COMMISSION ON UNDER- GRADUATE STUDIES RESOLUTION 1990-91E, CONCERNING THE INCOMPLETE GRADE. FIRST READING, APRIL 15, 1991. Dr. Carlisle moved approval of the resolution. The motion CARRIED. 8. SECOND READING, COMMISSION ON EXTENSION RESOLUTION 1990-91A, CONCERNING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN ACADEMY OF PUBLIC SERVICE EXCELLENCE. FIRST READING, APRIL 15, 1991. Dr. Marriott moved adoption of the resolution and deferred to Mr. Kennith Martin, President of the Extension Faculty Association, to provide additional rationale for passing the resolution. Mr. Martin noted that academic requirements for excellence in extension and public service are consistent with those for research and instruction. And while there is an Academy for Teaching Excellence, he observed, it has no counterpart in the Extension Division. He then read Virginia Tech's mission statement, highlighting within this statement additional justification for establish- ing the Academy. Finally, he stressed that the university is now encourag- ing greater public service, further justifying the creation of an Academy of Public Service Excellence. Dr. Hillison reported that the Faculty Senate voted not to endorse the resolution (10 opposed, 7 in favor, 6 abstentions) for several reasons: 1) there are already reward systems for Extension faculty, 2) the definition of "public service" is ambiguous, and 3) there is no similar academy for excellence in Research. Dr. Doug McAlister, Assistant Director for Community Resource Development, spoke in favor of the resolution, citing the Commission on Extension's unanimous support of the Academy, as well as CFA's prior endorsement of the concept of the Academy. Dr. McComas then called for the vote. The motion CARRIED. 9. SECOND READING, REPORT FROM THE JOINT TASK FORCE (JTF) ON UNIVERSITY COUNCIL, COMMISSIONS, AND COMMITTEES: RECOMMENDED CONSTITUTION REVISIONS, APRIL 3, 1991. FIRST READING, APRIL 11, 1991. Dr. Moore prefaced discussion of the Report by stating that approval of the Joint Task Force Report does not directly affect the constitutional by-laws of University Council; they continue to be in force. He also summarized the minor corrections and clarifications to the document (listed on one of the attachments), and distributed two organizational charts for the proposed new governance structure. Dr. Moore then reviewed the order of voting on the Report's recommendations, beginning with the two resolutions contained therein. o RESOLUTION 4.2 ON ADVISORY COUNCILS AND COMMISSIONS Dr. Moore moved adoption of the resolution recommending six commissions and two advisory councils. Dr. McComas then called for discussion. Dr. Hooper moved approval of his proposed amendment to the resolution allowing for both a Commission on Undergraduate Studies and Policies AND a Commission on Graduate Studies and Policies (APPENDIX C: ALTER- NATIVES FOR ACADEMIC COMMISSIONS). Dr. Marriott noted that both the Faculty Senate and the Commission on Extension support the two separate commissions. Mr. Townsend, representing the Graduate Student Assembly, also endorsed Dr. Hooper's amendment. The amendment, which provides for continuation of two separate commissions, CARRIED. Dr. Moore moved approval of the amendment to 9.1.2 to add the Universi- ty Librarian to the Commission on Graduate Studies and Policies. The motion CARRIED. Dr. Moore moved approval of the amendment to accept Appendix D (section 10.0) which would replace the proposed Commission on Research and Public Service with a Commission on Research AND a Commission on Public Service and Extension. The motion CARRIED. Dr. Moore then moved approval of Resolution 4.2 in its entirety as amended. The motion CARRIED. o RESOLUTION 3.1 ON UNIVERSITY COUNCIL Dr. Moore next moved approval of the resolution establishing the membership of University Council. Dr. McComas called for discussion. Dr. Crittenden presented and moved approval of his amendment to Resol- ution 3.1, which eliminates representation from the African American community. He argued that if one "special interest" group is singled out for Council representation, "all special interest groups not directly associated with instruction, research, and extension, as in the case with the BFSC [Black Faculty and Staff Caucus] and BOC [Black Organizations Council], should be represented equally." Dr. Hillison reported that the Faculty Senate voted "rather overwhelmingly" to endorse Dr. Crittenden's amendment. Dr. Moore, Dr. Sorensen, and Mr. Townsend spoke to the history and rationale for the Task Force's decision to include an African American representative on Council. Specifically, Dr. Moore stressed that even though African Americans are by far the largest minority at Virginia Tech, there have been few African American representatives on any major governing body at this institution. Dr. Goodale spoke against the amendment, stating that including an African American on University Council represents a move toward both equal opportunity and affirmative action, and would result in a more democratic system of government. Mr. Gherman also voiced his opposition to the amendment, stating that University Council should be as large as it needs to be to represent all constituencies. Others who spoke against the amendment included Dr. Hooper, Ms. Byrne, Mr. Mottley, Dr. Geyer, Ms. Barroso, Dr. Eng, and Dr. Carlisle. Dr. Charles Pinder, President of the Black Faculty and Staff Caucus, also supported the need for African American participation on University Council. Dr. Goodale called for the question and the motion was accepted. Dr. McComas then called for the vote on the amendment to eliminate the seat reserved for an African American. The motion FAILED. Dr. Moore introduced and moved adoption of amendment to reserve two chairs on University Council for representatives of the African Ameri- can community -- one elected by the Black Faculty and Staff Caucus, and one elected by the Black Organizations Council [representing students]. Those who voiced their support of the amendment included Dr. Goodale, Mr. Townsend, Dr. Hooper, and Dr. Sorensen. Dr. Grayson also spoke at length about the need for African American participation on University Council, stating that it could have important political ramifications for the future. He also said that Black student representation on Council could provide a recruiting point for Virginia Tech. Dr. Moore called for the question and the motion was accepted. Dr. McComas then called for the vote on the amendment to include two repre- sentatives from the African American community. The motion CARRIED. Dr. Moore introduced Dr. Kingston's amendment to review at the end of ten years the necessity to have a reserved seat(s) on University Council for the African American community. Dr. Kingston moved adoption of the amendment, voicing his hope that African American participation in university governance would increase through the regular election process, thus reducing the necessity for a reserved seat on Council. Mr. Gherman spoke briefly against the amendment, reminding Council that the representation of no other individual or group is slated for future review. Dr. McComas called for the vote. The motion FAILED. Dr. Moore moved approval of the amendment to include the chairs of the eight Commissions. The motion CARRIED. o Dr. Moore moved to accept the sense of the Joint Task Force Report, recommending, however, that the proposed Faculty/Staff Internships in University Governance be opened to all faculty and staff members (rather than reserved for designated constituencies). The motion CARRIED. 10. ANNOUNCEMENTS Having thanked Dr. Moore for his extraordinary efforts as chair of the Joint Task Force, Dr. McComas addressed Council on the importance of maintaining a sense of community. He noted that these have been challeng- ing times for Virginia Tech -- not only in budgetary terms, but also with regard to human relations -- and asked Council members to recognize that "people of good will can differ." In closing, he stressed the importance of working together to support the diverse constituencies on this campus. The meeting adjourned at 5:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Larry A. Harris Executive Assistant to the President LAH:lg
VT History | Digital Library and Archives | Special Collections | University Archives
Send questions or comments to:
Tamara Kennelly, University Archivist
University Libraries
Virginia Tech
P.O. Box 90001
Blacksburg, VA, 24062-9001URL: http://spec.lib.vt.edu/minutes/ucm/1991/April+25++1991.html
Last modified on: Tuesday, 25-Sep-2001 13:57:49 EDT