January 20, 2023

Meeting of the Faculty Council

Friday, January 20, 2023
3:00 to 5:00 p.m.
Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina Foundation Auditorium (0001 Michael Hooker Research Center)
Gillings School of Global Public Health

The meeting was recorded and can be viewed at this link.

Agenda

3:00 p.m.   Opening remarks
                         Secretary of the Faculty Jill Moore

3:10 p.m.   Update on COVID-19 pandemic (Prof. Weber’s Slides [PDF])
                         Prof. Amir Barzin (Family Medicine)
                         Prof. David Weber (Infectious Diseases and Epidemiology)

3:25 p.m.   Presentation of the 2022 Thomas Jefferson Award
                        Presented by Chancellor Kevin Guskiewicz)
                        Nominator’s remarks by Prof. Marc Lange (Philosophy)
                        Awardee’s remarks by Prof. Geoffrey Sayre-McCord (Philosophy)

3:40 p.m.   Chancellor’s remarks and Q&A
                         Chancellor Kevin Guskiewicz

3:55 p.m.   Provost’s remarks and Q&A
                         Provost Christopher Clemens

4:10 p.m.   Introduction to Vice Chancellor for Communications Kamrhan Farwell with Q&A (Slides [PDF])

4:25 p.m.   University Approved Absence Policy (Slides [PDF])
                         Prof. Lorraine Cramer (Microbiology and Immunology), chair of the Educational Policy Committee
                         Dean of Students Desirée Rieckenberg (Office of Student Affairs)
                         Prof. Joy Renner (Radiologic Science; Health and Faculty Advisor, Academic Advising)
                         Mr. Chris Skowronek (Coordinator, University Approved Absence Office)
                         Prof. Meg Zomorodi (Nursing)

4:50 p.m.   Annual Committee Reports (presented by title)

• • • Committee on Appointments, Promotions, and Tenure [PDF]; chaired by Prof. Joan Krause (Law)
    • Committee on University Government [PDF]; chaired by Prof. Joy Renner (Radiologic Science)
    • Educational Policy Committee [PDF]; chaired by Prof. Lorraine Cramer (Microbiology and Immunology)
    • Faculty Assembly Delegation [PDF]; chaired by Prof. Jan Hannig (Statistics and Operations Research)

5:00 p.m.   Adjournment

Video of Proceedings

Watch the full video [Streaming]

Journal of Proceedings of the Faculty Council

The Faculty Council of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill convened on January 20, 2023 at 3:00 p.m. in Michael Hooker Research Center, Room 0001, and via Zoom.

The following 75 Faculty Council members attended: Aikat, Alderman, Alexander, Ansong, Balasubramanian, Berkoff, Binz, Boyd, Brownley, Burch, Cai, Campbell, Charles, Clement, Colford, Cook, De Fays, DeHart-Davis, Dillman Carpentier, Divaris, Donahue, Estroff, Frederick, Freeman, Gold, Goralski, Guskiewicz (Chancellor) Hackney, Haggis, Halpern, Hannig, Hodges, Jackson, Johnson, Krause, La Serna, Lain, Lin, McLaughlin, McNeilly, Mehrotra, Mendez, Metcalfe, Meyer, Mohanty, Moore (Secretary of the Faculty), Moracco, Muller, Neal, Nichols, Oliveira, Penton, Pettifor, Reissner, Renner, Reyes, Roberts, Rose, Sathy, Schlobohm, Sena-Soberano, J. Smith, Triumph, Turi, Vernon-Feagans, Vines, Wahl, Weiler, Wiltshire, Winget, Wolfe, Yaghoobi, Young, Zeeman and Zomorodi.

The following 12 members received excused absences: Becker, Chapman (Chair of the Faculty), Drummond, Lensing, Lopez, Ma, Menard, Mayer-Davis, McEntee, Plenge, K. Smith and Watson.

The following 4 members were absent without excuse: Entwisle, Gates-Foster, Thornburg and Thorp.

Others in attendance: Clemens (Provost), Samantha Golden (Graduate Observer) and Tucker Stillman (Undergraduate Observer).

Call to Order
Secretary of the Faculty Jill Moore called the meeting to order at 3:02 p.m.

Opening remarks
Secretary of the Faculty Jill Moore presided over the meeting in Chair of the Faculty Mimi Chapman’s absence. She welcomed everyone and made several announcements:

• Amendments to The Faculty Code of University Government that were approved by the Faculty Council in November passed on the required second vote of the entire (voting) faculty that closed in December 2022. These amendments reduce the term lengths of the chair and secretary of the faculty and create the new positions of chair of the faculty-elect and past-chair. Implementation of the Code changes will not take effect until 2025. As such, they will not affect the terms of the chair being elected this year.
• Beth Posner (Law) is hosting a series of faculty listening sessions on the future of the Carolina Women’s Center through the end of January. Details were in the Faculty Governance newsletter and are also available on the Faculty Governance website.
• Nominations are being accepted for honorary degrees to be awarded at the Spring 2024 Commencement (or later) through Feb. 13.
• The Fixed-Term Faculty Committee is surveying fixed-term faculty to help plan a networking event. The survey closes on Jan. 31.
• The University and UNC Health are jointly sponsoring a project to study housing affordability in and around Chapel Hill. All University employees (including faculty and graduate students) have been sent a housing survey that closes on Jan. 31.
• The annual Faculty Interest Survey is open through Jan. 26. The data is used to help create slates of candidates for this year’s faculty election and for membership on appointed committees. Faculty Council members are encouraged to complete this year’s survey and to encourage their colleagues to do the same. Faculty do not to have to be Faculty Council members to serve on a committee. Our faculty governance structure gives a wide variety of faculty the opportunity to participate.

COVID-19 Update
Professor David Weber (Infectious Diseases; Epidemiology) gave a presentation [PDF] on the current state of COVID-19 in the area and the state with a focus on XBB sublineages. Locally, test positivity and hospitalizations are down. However, COVID-19 continues to be the third leading cause of death in the U.S. Infection rates have gone up lately due to holiday travel and the growth of the XBB variant. He briefly went over the recent sublineages. Fortunately, antivirals, such as Paxlovid, continue to be effective against these new strains of the virus.

Prof. Weber recommends the bivalent vaccine, which has proven effective in preventing severe illness and death. Unfortunately, uptake of the bivalent booster has not been high.

Prof. Amir Barzin (Family Medicine) added that outpatient treatment options continue to be available at “test and treat centers” across the state. Eligibility for Paxlovid, the antiviral medication approved for COVID-19, is now available for people aged 50 and up. Previously, it was available only to those aged 65 and older.

Prof. Audrey Pettifor (Epidemiology) who is a strong proponent of Paxlovid noted that some general practitioners in the area are not recommending it for people under 65, particularly those with mild symptoms.

Prof. Weber would like to see more people who are eligible for Paxlovid to use this safe treatment. He added that it’s imperative to take it as soon as symptoms present with a reminder that home tests can show as negative for the first two days of COVID, and that PCR test are highly accurate. Paxlovid reduces death, severe symptoms, and long COVID. He feels it is underutilized citing that 500 people are dying of COVID in this country each day.

Prof. Barzin mentioned that in the past low availability of the medication constrained its use. Now, Paxlovid is widely available and should be used.

Prof. Eric Muller (Law) thanked the presenters for the information they’ve provided since the beginning of the pandemic and added that COVID-19 doesn’t feel as much as a crisis now. He asked them if 1) they can share data about percentage of people who develop long COVID, and 2) if vaccination status is a strong indicator, should we anticipate getting a booster every 6 months?

Prof. Weber answered the long COVID question first clarifying that there is not yet a commonly accepted case definition. It’s estimated that 15-80% of people will have long COVID symptoms for 8-12 weeks. 30-50% of those people recover in 30 days. Numbers decrease with time, though for some people, long COVID lasts longer than a year. The long COVID clinic [UNC COVID-19 Recovery Clinic] run by Prof. John Barrata has cared for more than 1500 patients with long-term COVID to date. Older age and/or comorbidities with other illnesses are the main reasons for long COVID. He reiterated that vaccines and Paxlovid reduce the risks of long COVID.

In response to the question about vaccines, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention don’t know how often people will need to get vaccinated. A combination MRNA shot for flu and COVID is being developed.

Arlene Seña (Medicine) said there was still some confusion regarding best practices for re-entry for those who contract COVID, especially since positive antigen tests which can remain positive for a period of time. She asked Drs. Barzin and Weber to clarify what people should do, especially since Occupational Health is no longer involved.

Prof. Barzin set aside health care setting recommendations and addressed general public recommendations, which are more salient to most faculty at the University. The general recommendation from the CDC has been following the protocol in which the onset of symptoms or first day of a positive test (for those who are asymptomatic) is considered day zero of five days of isolation followed by five days of wearing a mask in public or around immunocompromised people. However, one major caveat is that the individual’s symptoms must be improving, and he or she must be fever free. He recommends that people consult their providers for their individual isolation recommendations.

Secretary Moore expressed her appreciation for the information and recommendations Professors Weber and Barzin, and their associates, have willingly provided for the past several years. Chancellor Guskiewicz added his thanks for their expertise and assistance. He reminisced on how we’re nearing the third anniversary of shifting to fully remote teaching. Fortunately, we are back to what he calls “normal school” now.

Presentation of the 2022 Thomas Jefferson Award
Chancellor Guskiewicz announced that the winner of the Thomas Jefferson Award for academic year 2022-23 is Professor Geoffrey Sayre-McCord of the Department of Philosophy and director of UNC’s popular Philosophy, Politics, and Economics Program (PPE).

Prof. Sayre-McCord and one of his nominators, Philosophy Professor Marc Lange were called forward for the award presentation. Prof. Lange read his citation [PDF].

Prof. Sayre-McCord then expressed his thanks to the faculty for teaching and making a difference in students’ lives and the quality of life in North Carolina and much more broadly. He said it’s a great honor to receive this award and an honor to be here at Carolina.

Chancellor’s remarks
Chancellor Kevin Guskiewicz began his remarks saying that he’s excited about where we’re heading as a university and community.

He’s excited about the IDEAS in Action general education curriculum. It was launched in the fall and has been immensely successful, garnering lots of positive feedback. Even so, it’s being assessed, and adjustments are in preparation. The chancellor appreciates the new curriculum’s focus on experiential learning.

The administration is currently focused on three initiatives related to the University’s strategic plan, Carolina Next, Innovations for the Public Good:

1. Enabling career development for faculty, staff and students. He just charged a new committee on career development with the goal being to provide students with resources and essential skills they need for life beyond UNC. It is important to prepare students for careers and jobs that don’t even exist yet. This committee includes alumni and BOT members.
2. Promoting democracy. A new committee on advancing academic freedom and free speech chaired by Prof. Christian Lundberg (Communication) that includes the chancellor, provost, Vice Chancellor Kamrhan Farwell and others on the leadership team will be charged next week. The committee will also be comprised of several faculty members, staff members and two student leaders.
3. Ensuring Carolina remains a top 5 public research university. To this end, the administration has held discussions with the deans on how to continue at a high level of research and plans to survey the faculty to get their input.

Regarding the Supreme Court case the University is involved in, the outcome will not be known until mid-late May at the earliest, though it is more likely to be decided in June. The chancellor thanked Vice Provost for Enrollment Rachelle Feldman and others on her team for convening regularly to prepare for all potential outcomes of the Court’s ruling. We are committed to ensuring that we have a diverse student body that we know allows our students to thrive such that everyone can experience the educational benefits that diversity brings.

The Next Grand Challenges Initiative was launched in the fall to help us stay connected to donors as we bridge this past campaign with the next one. It is leveraging the success of the recently completed $5 billion capital campaign. An event at the Eddie Smith Field House in November celebrated the end of the campaign. The highlight was the student presentations on the impact that fellowships, scholarships and aid have had on their time at the University.

The new Vice Chancellor for Development, Michael Andreasen, is starting on Monday. He recently arrived in Chapel Hill from the University of Oregon where he was the senior vice president for university advancement.

Other leadership searches are concluding soon. Searches for a vice provost for the University Libraries and a dean of the School of Government are concluding. He hopes to make some announcements about the positions next week.

The chancellor expressed his appreciation of School of Education Dean Fouad Abd-El-Khalick on the successful launch of the lab school in Person County, which is already making a positive difference. The next step is to expand to Chatham County. The National Assessment of Progress Study found that 68% of North Carolina 4^th graders scored below prolific in reading. UNC-System President Peter Hans and other leaders have asked the System schools to participate in improving education in the state by training high quality teachers.

Provost’s Remarks
Provost Chris Clemens began his remarks by stressing that he has made advocating for our rights and privileges as faculty his guiding purpose and principle. He sees his primary charge as the advocate-in-chief for the faculty.

He then highlighted a few events

• On Sunday, we will wrap up our weeklong Dr. Martin Luther King Jr celebration, which is the longest standing collegiate celebration in honor of Dr. King and his legacy.
• The College of Arts and Sciences has launched its new DEI strategic plan called Action steps for Equity led by Prof. Karla Slocum who also serves as senior associate dean for diversity, equity and inclusion in the College.
• The Provost’s Office has made diversity of every kind a priority in staffing by recruiting academics and administrators for leadership positions that not only represent our campus but increase the diversity in our community of leaders and the leadership pipeline on this campus.
• An emerging set of conversations needs to take place about artificial intelligence with the advent of ChatGPT, and how machines can generate C-level work, which is likely to improve over time.
• The Board of Governors (BOG) will be discussing a proposed resolution on compelled speech. He does not know what form it will take or whether it will be adopted but does know it will be the subject of many conversations among the faculty. Academic freedom is the bedrock principle at the center of these conversations. He assured the Faculty Council that both he and the chancellor are as passionate about academic freedom as the faculty. He is confident that with faculty input and guidance, we can pursue our shared goal of creating a place of inclusion and belonging while upholding our commitment to academic freedom.

The floor was open for questions.

Prof. Allison Schlobohm (Business) expressed concern about the news about compelled speech coming from the BOG. If they pass the proposed code change regarding speech during the hiring and enrollment processes, do schools or individual departments have any options? For example, there are instances when a candidate’s DEI views matter, especially if we want to continue to have a diverse University. Prof. Schlobohm teaches DEI classes and is concerned. If certain types of speech are restricted will her ability to teach a class be limited?

Chancellor Guskiewicz replied that he believes President Hans is making an effort to be proactive. The proposal should not limit any professor’s ability to teach a class; it has nothing to do with the classroom environment. It is appropriate to ask candidates about their lived experiences to gauge how they might contribute to the academic climate of your department or school. As the proposal is currently worded, the point is that we would not be able to require someone on an application or in an interview to respond to questions about current political sentiments.

Prof. Schlobohm wondered if asking a question about how a candidate would create an inclusive classroom is going to be allowable?

The chancellor thinks that would be appropriate in an interview setting. He stressed that he wants to see the final wording and if it passes first. He said that President Hans wants to get input from faculty and staff and suggested it be done through the Faculty Assembly chair.

The provost added that faculty need to have a visible conversation about what they would assert they need to do to protect academic freedom. He wants to listen to those conversations and from them assemble the norms we want to protect on this campus under any policy that comes. His philosophy is that there should be a bottom-up structure where the faculty set the norms of academic freedom. It will be good to spend the next weeks having those conversations publicly, so BOG members can see the faculty thought process. He is happy to engage with faculty both collectively and individually.

Concerning the proposed code amendment by the BOG, Prof. Muller is concerned about the word “solicit” in the resolution, e.g., prohibition about not being able to “require or solicit” opinions about certain matters. He pointed out that “solicit” means simply asking for something, which is different than requiring something. On another point, he was happy to hear about the speech and academic freedom committee that chancellor announced and asked which faculty members will serve on it.

Chancellor Guskiewicz replied that the membership will be posted as soon as the committee is formally charged. The committee will consist mostly of faculty. President Hans has said it’s a group he may want to consult on the proposed policy.

Introduction to new Vice Chancellor for Communications Kamrhan Farwell
Secretary Moore announced that Kamrhan Farwell has been UNC’s vice chancellor for communications since September and came here from the University of Missouri. Ms. Farwell began with a bit of background information, then gave a brief presentation [PDF] about University Communications and her plans for it.

Her first step has been to work to sharpen the University’s focus by examining what we are doing and if it’s working. She believes it’s important to always be evolving. The pandemic highlighted the need to be adaptable.

Faculty should consider what we (as a University) want to talk about the most, and what do we want the world to know about us? E.g., what specifics do faculty wish NC legislators knew about the University?

Her goal is to create a “surround sound” to deliver messages using a variety of channels and methods. University Communications spends lots of time and effort figuring out how to provide visibility to the faculty. The faculty are the reason students are here.

Some things faculty can do:

• It is recommended to start with your unit’s communicator(s), though faculty may reach out directly to University Communications.
• University Communications pitches faculty experts all the time to provide their expertise to the media on current events. Faculty interested in serving as an expert should let her group know they are available.
• University Communications offers media training to faculty on how to make their research accessible to a lay audience
• Carolina News Studio is a partnership between the Hussman School of Journalism and University Communications. It provides a high-quality way to participate remotely in newscasts. The low quality of Zoom is going by the wayside and this studio provides the more professional option that the media seek now. The studio is open 24-7 and has a designated parking spot.

Prof. Sridhar Balasubramanian (Business) said he was struck by the story-telling points Ms. Farwell made; he is a big believer in strategic storytelling to build organizational structure. However, if stories are not institutionalized, they recede into dusty corners. He has often wished for a “Carolina Story Book” that contains the best of all our stories across schools and across constituents that is given to every new student and employee upon arrival. Such an item can serve to anchor people to the institution: who we are and what we value.

Ms. Farwell was amenable; there is an opportunity to have a searchable archive on a digital channel to package the digital stories of Carolina.

Christina Burch (Biology) on Zoom asked how faculty can find their unit’s local communicator.  Ms. Farwell said faculty can email her. She will have lead school communicators added to the University Communications website, which currently is being refurbished.

Prof. Hugo Mendez (Religious Studies) wondered which media sources reach out to UNC for potential interviews or what kind of interests attract those news outlets?

Ms. Farwell replied that we receive robust interest from all levels of media. As a university with a journalism school, most media requests come from student journalists. We also get a fair number of questions from the Raleigh News and Observer as the leading regional paper. UNC draws national attention, and we receive frequent requests from the national media, which often wants to know where UNC fits in on larger issues. To keep a focus on our exceptional research, we can work more to place those stories at the national level. Media pitches are highly competitive among large universities. The communications team has been successful with its pitches and is working to get more exposure for the University.

University Excused Absence Policy
Dean of Students Desirée Rieckenberg was joined by Educational Policy Committee (EPC) members Prof. Lorraine Cramer (Genetics), who chairs the committee, and Prof. Meg Zomorodi (Nursing). Their main aim was to raise awareness about the University Approved Absence Office (UAAO) to discuss class attendance policy—including common misconceptions about it—and to share resources.

Dean Rieckenberg began by addressing some common misconceptions about the absence policy, which are outlined in her slides [PDF].

The last version of the absence policy was approved by the Faculty Council in 2018. The University Approved Absence Office was created in 2019. The UAAO consists of one staff member.

Now that the campus has returned to in-person teaching, it is important to assess the absence policy.

The three most common misconceptions that follow are not true:

• A University Approved Absence (UAA) must be present to approve an absence and/or offer a makeup accommodation.
• It is optional to for faculty comply with Class Attendance Policy on University Approved Absence.
• If an absence doesn’t get approved for a UAA, faculty can’t accommodate a student’s absence.

The number of UAAs is staggeringly high (especially since COVID- or Athletics-related ones are not included—they are handled separately) and is on a trajectory to increase this year.

The UAA policy was meant to address a much smaller piece of the overall attendance issue when it comes to students engaging in their classes.

The data indicate the increases are caused by the misconceptions mentioned above, which in turn indicate a lack of awareness of UAA policy and how it works. It’s critical for students to know when to approach the UAAO.  The number one request submitted to the UAAO is due to commonly occurring illnesses, such as flu, colds and strep. Students should engage directly with faculty about these types of absences and on how to actively engage in the course when they must stay home to not spread the illness. Faculty do not need permission to approve and/or excuse any absences.

The number of unnecessary requests creates a bottleneck that slows down response time for critical issues.

A class attendance policy has long been in existence. The 2018 update was intended to add clarity and provide a base level of expectations for both students and faculty.

She reiterated that UAAs are NOT required for faculty to work directly with students around their absence needs.

If a student approaches a faculty member with an issue about attendance that is significantly impactful, faculty should consider how to support the student through the classroom lens. Faculty are welcome to refer students to the Dean of Students’ Office through a care referral form so that the Office can provide appropriate support outside the classroom.

Circumstances considered UAAs:

• Authorized University activities (e.g., NCAA athletics or academic presentations)
• Disability/religious observance/pregnancy (legal compliance component)
• Significant health condition and/or a personal/family emergency

Students are required to provide documentation (to the UAAO). Faculty should know that when they receive a notice from the UAA office, the absence has already been vetted.

Prof. Zomorodi said the EPC has been working on the UAA over the past year and will continue working on it this year. She will ask Council members to sign up to be “champions” for their departments and schools.

She underscored that a faculty member can do several things on their own:

• Excuse a student from class and/or allow makeup work without sending the student to the UAA office.
• Excuse a student from class and/or allow makeup work even if the student does not have a UAA.
• Devise their own strategies regarding how makeup work is handled as long as it meets the minimum standard for coursework.

[The slides include several scenarios that Prof. Zomorodi described.]

Faculty are encourage to review the “FAQs for Faculty” on UAAO website [HTML] and to read the actual policy that can be found on today’s slides.

This issue is a complicated one with several variables. The EPC is asking Faculty Council members to engage with faculty in their units and have conversations about the UAA. Council members (and other faculty) who find areas that require more clarification may reach out to the EPC. The EPC is discussing how to determine how the percentage of class time missed affects learning.

The slides include a QR code to sign up to be a UAA “champion trainer” by taking a brief survey.

The presenters took questions.

Prof. Schlobohm said she sends students to the UAAO when they share sensitive information with her (such as an emotional trauma). By going through the UAAO, the student won’t have to share personal information with every professor. She wondered if there was a way to alert all of a student’s professors without providing details.

Dean Rieckenberg replied that sensitive situations should be channeled to the Dean of Students’ Office through the Care Referral Form on the Dean of Students’ website.

Prof. Zomorodi clarified that, if a student receives a UAA, a faculty member cannot ask them to disclose the reason for it, because it has already been vetted by the UAAO.

Prof. Burch said she hears positive things about the Care Referral Form from students. While she appreciates aspects of the UAA, she and her colleagues struggle with it in large classes where a faculty member might get 10-20 requests at a time. It’s difficult and time-consuming to accommodate 10-20 makeup exams. Her department tries to have policies to help circumvent the need for a UAA. For example, regardless of reason, students are allowed to miss up to 3 classes per semester. Would appreciate feedback on that approach. The UAAs seem most appropriate for students who have to miss multiple weeks.

Prof. Cramer replied that the EPC has considered all these scenarios. The committee has spoken with faculty who teach large courses and learned about the burden of creating makeup exams. It is also benchmarking with faculty from other large universities on how they handle absences. One of the committee’s goals is to alleviate faculty burnout.

Prof. Burch asked about grading policies; instead of offering makeup exams, can a faculty member allow a student to drop an exam with a UAA? This practice was done in the past, but it seems to be discouraged now.

Prof. Cramer pointed out the need to still provide a practice exam or something similar so the student can identify the type of information the class was tested on.

Prof. Anthony Hackney (Exercise and Sport Science) said that Counseling Services (CAPS) has sent messages to him when a student has been struggling. As a result of that, he now directs students who are struggling [with mental health] to CAPS so they don’t have to share their issue(s) with more than one person.

Dean Rieckenberg agreed with that approach adding that faculty may also hear from gender violence coordinators and the Equal Opportunity and Compliance Office regarding a student’s status. She underscored the need for the University to offer multiple avenues for students to get help.

Prof. Cramer said the EPC is working to ensure that both students and faculty are being taken care of. No one expected COVID, which resulted in allowing more lenience on absences. Some students are assuming that such leniency is continuing, which it is not. An instructor’s UAA policy should be on the syllabus.

Prof. Jennifer Smith (Linguistics) said she doesn’t want students to miss class, but also doesn’t want them to come to class if they’re COVID symptomatic or ill. She would appreciate guidance on how to navigate encouraging class participation without encouraging the spread of viruses.

Prof. Cramer replied that COVID and flu are both of concern, and students should not attend class if they are symptomatic. She has a policy of allowing a certain percentage of absences in her classes. The EPC is trying to figure out a wider policy a faculty member can say, this is the policy.

Prof. Zomorodi said the EOC is also working with the Center for Faculty Excellence on messaging.

Annual Committee reports by title
Four committee reports were provided in advance to be considered by title:

• Committee on Appointments, Promotions, and Tenure
• Committee on University Government
• Educational Policy
• Faculty Assembly Delegation

The committee chairs were present to take questions. There were no questions.

Barring no objections, Secretary Moore invited the Council to accept all four reports at once by unanimous consent. No objections were raised, and the reports were accepted by title.

The February meeting will be in the same location.

Adjournment
Its business having concluded, the Faculty Council adjourned at 4:56 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Helena Knego
University Program Specialist

Jill Moore
Secretary of the Faculty