MINUTES OF THE ACADEMIC COUNCIL

TENNESSEE TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY

January 25, 2006

The Academic Council met at 3 p.m. on Wednesday, January 25, 2006, in the Deans’ Conference Room of Derryberry Hall with Jeff Roberts, Chairperson, presiding.

The following members of the Council were present:

Prof. Rebecca Tolbert Dr. Jann Cupp

Dr. Wade Faw Dr. David Larimore

Dr. Jack Armistead Dr. P.K. Rajan

Dr. Susan Elkins Prof. Darlene Franklin

Dr. Robert Niebuhr Dr. Brian O’Connor

Dr. Winston Walden Dr. John Harris

Ms. Amy Campbell Dr. Darrell Hoy

Ms. Shannon Morgan Dr. Gretta Stanger

Dr. Cathy Cunningham Dr. Chris Brown

Dr. Susan Laningham Dr. Tony Baker

Dr. Jeff Roberts Dr. Linda Null

Dr. Mark Stephens

Dr. John Wheeler attended for Dr. Garber. Attending as resource persons were Ms. Yvonne Gribble, Dr. Leo McGee, Dr. Francis Otuonye, and Dr. Paul Semmes.

The following members of the Council were absent:

Dr. Roy Loutzenheiser Dr. Joseph Biernacki

Ms. Alathea Thompson Prof. Delane Stewart

Dr. Jim Baier Prof. Ray Jordan

Dr. Christine Miller

SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGS

1. Approved the agenda as distributed.

2. Approved the minutes of the October 12 meeting.

3. Approved a revision to the Faculty Handbook (1.1.2 Evaluation of Instruction)

to comply with SACS Comprehensive Standard 3.7.2.

4. Approved a revision in the Procedures of the Graduate School Executive

Committee.

5. Received an update on revising the Academic Misconduct Policy.

6. Approved a proposal to require Sexual Harassment Awareness Training in

UNIV 1020 or its equivalent course.

PROCEEDINGS

Approval of the Agenda

Professor Tolbert MOVED approval of the agenda, and Professor Franklin SECONDED the motion. The agenda was APPROVED as distributed.

Approval of the Minutes of the October 12 Meeting

Dr. Faw MOVED approval of the minutes of the October 12 meeting, and Dr. Stanger SECONDED the motion. The minutes were APPROVED as posted on the web.

SACS Compliance – Revision in the Evaluation of Part-Time Faculty

Dr. McGee announced that everyone needs to be available for the SACS visiting seven-member team site visit, April 11-13. In response to concerns raised by SACS, he presented a proposed revision to Section 1.1.2, Evaluation of Instruction, in the Faculty Handbook. Dr. McGee read SACS Standard 3.7.2 which requires that all persons with instructional duties be evaluated. To comply with this Standard, in addition to publishing our policies for evaluating full-time faculty, we must publish evaluation policies and practices for part-time faculty and graduate teaching assistants.

Dr. Larimore MOVED approval of the proposed change in Section 1.1.2 of the Faculty Handbook, and Professor Franklin SECONDED the motion. It was clarified that the evaluation is the IDEA student evaluation that is done by students. Considerable discussion ensued regarding the availability of the results of IDEA evaluations because it takes several weeks or months to get the results back and the part-time instructors may not be on campus. The motion to approve the proposed changes CARRIED by a unanimous vote. Dr. Barker asked for editorial changes to make the definitions of faculty consistent, and Dr. Roberts said that this would be done. Section 1.1.2 in the Faculty Handbook as revised and with editorial changes now reads:

Tenure-track, full-time temporary, and part-time faculty, as well as teaching assistants with grading responsibility for courses, will have all their courses evaluated every semester (summer courses excluded). The results of these evaluations will be reviewed at least once per year in connection with personnel actions by the chairperson and, in cases of tenure-track faculty, by the dean or director. This review will be based on the available results of IDEA surveys and other evaluation tools appropriate to the discipline. The results of course evaluation and of their review by administrators will be made available to the instructor and placed in his or her file, and may be used to inform decisions about professional development, improvement of instruction, and future teaching assignments.

The above change becomes effective with the 2006-07 academic year.

Revision of the Procedures of the Graduate School Executive Committee

Dr. Paul Semmes, Chairperson of the Graduate School Executive Committee, said that because SACS requires that the curricula of all credit-bearing programs devolve from the faculty, a statement to this effect should appear in the Procedures of the Graduate School Executive Committee. He read the proposed three sentences to be added under Section II. Purpose and Scope. Dr. Faw MOVED approval of the revision, and Dr. Harris SECONDED the motion. For clarity, at the beginning of the second sentence, “Each unit or departmental faculty” was changed to “The faculty of each unit or department.” The revision PASSED by a unanimous vote.

Academic Council Recommendations on the Academic Misconduct Policy

Dr. Roberts presented an update on our Academic Misconduct Policy and said that various groups have been working since last summer to revise the Policy. He said there are two paths to the Policy. One path is to revise the procedures when a student challenges the charge of plagiarism, and the attempt here is to move the jurisdiction away from Student Affairs back to the faculty. The Deans Council last fall proposed a policy similar to the Grade Appeal Policy. Dr. Roberts said he met with the Deans Council this morning, and he said that Academic Council members should receive a revised copy of this proposal within the next few weeks.

Another aspect of the Policy is what we are going to do as an institution to instruct the student body about plagiarism. The Council discussed the issue at length and made many suggestions for educating students about plagiarism. Some of the ideas suggested are to: require a test similar to the Sexual Harassment Awareness Test; include information in introductory courses; establish a code of ethics; and encourage faculty to help students avoid plagiarism. It was pointed out that it might be helpful to seek ideas from other schools. Dr. Roberts asked the Council for suggestions about how to educate the students on plagiarism. Dr. Barker reminded the group that the problem is that TBR requires us to have an Academic Misconduct Policy, and he encouraged everyone to give Dr. Roberts input on this issue. Dr. Tony Baker volunteered to work on a definition of plagiarism.

Sexual Harassment Awareness Training for Freshmen in UNIV 1020

Professor Tolbert said the question is whether or not to require all freshmen to take the beginning Sexual Harassment on-line tutorial and test. Professor Franklin MOVED that all freshmen successfully complete the Sexual Harassment Awareness test in UNIV 1020 or its equivalent course Dr. Stanger SECONDED the motion, and the motion CARRIED by a unanimous vote.

Such Other Matters

Dr. O’Connor asked about the time change from noon to 10 a.m. for turning in grades to the Records Office. It was pointed out that this change was approved by the Academic Council at the time that Friday exams during exam week were discontinued. The reason for the change was to give the Records Office more time since we cannot run grades until all the grades have been turned in. Dean Armistead pointed out that it is possible to get permission from the chairperson and the dean to give an exam the last day of class if it is anticipated that there will be a problem getting the grades in on time.

Dr. Barker said that we need to have sexual harassment awareness training for all new people on campus every semester and they need to successfully complete the training by the end of the semester. This requirement would include transfer students, new graduate students, new faculty, and new adjunct faculty

Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at 4:40 pm.