Skip to main content

Meeting of the General Faculty and the Faculty Council

September 15, 2000, 3:00 p.m.

Assembly Room, 2nd Floor, Wilson Library

Chancellor James Moeser and Professor Sue Estroff will preside.


3:00 Call to Order. The Secretary of the Faculty

INFO 3:00 Greetings from the Board of Trustees and Introduction of the Chancellor

  • Anne Wilmoth Cates, Chair of the Board of Trustees

INFO 3:05 Chancellor’s Remarks and Question Time

  • Chancellor James Moeser invites questions or comment on any topic.

INFO 3:25 Presentation of the Hettleman Awards

ACT 3:35 Installation of the Chair of the Faculty

INFO 3:40 Remarks. Robert Bradley Matthews, Jr., Class of 2001, President of the Student Body.

INFO 3:45 Remarks. Joanne Kucharski, Chair of the Employee Forum.

INFO 3:50 Remarks. Professor Sue E. Estroff, Chair of the Faculty.

DISC 4:05 Open Discussion of Topics Raised by Council Members

INFO 4:25 Faculty Council Expectations and Procedures. Professor Joseph S. Ferrell, Secretary of the Faculty.

ACT 4:35 Memorial Resolutions

  • Robert A. Howard, Professor Emeritus of Art.

Harriet L. Rheingold, Professor Emerita of Psychology.

ACT 4:45 Faculty Grievance Committee Report. Professor John Schopler, Chair 1999-00.

ACT 4:50 Resolution 2000-12. Amending the Faculty Code to Allow Faculty in Phased Retirement, if Otherwise Qualified, to Serve on All Faculty Committees and in Other Elected Offices. (First Reading) Presented by the Committee on University Government.

INFO 4:55 Call for Nominations for Teaching Awards. Professor Celia Hooper.

ACT 5:00 Adjourn


Joseph S. Ferrell
Secretary of the Faculty


ACT = Action
DISC = Discussion
INFO = Information


Faculty Council Attendance

Present (57): Adler, Allison, Ammerman, Angel, Assani, Blackburn, Bolas, Boxill, Bromberg, Carelli, Chenault, Clegg, Cordeiro-Stone, Cotton, Crawford-Brown, Daye, Drake, Elvers, Files, Fishman, Fowler, George, Gilland, Graham, Granger, Grossberg, Haskill, Kagarise, Kaufman, Kessler, LeFebvre, Lester, Lubker, Ludlow, Madison, McCormick, McKeown, Meehan-Black, Metzguer, P. Molina, Moreau, Nelson, Otey, Panter, Pfaff, Plante, Rao, Reinert, Rosenfeld, Savitz, Slatt, Straughan, Strauss, Vaughn, Walsh, Weiss, Williams.

Excused absences (27): Bell, Bender, Bollen, Bowen, Bynum, De La Cadena, Dominguez, Huang, Janda, Ketch, Kjervik, Kopp, Kupper, McQueen, Meece, Meyer, A. Molina, Moran, Postema, Raab-Traub, Raasch, Regester, Smith, Steponaitis, Sueta, Taft, Tauchen.

Unexcused absences (3): Henry, Sekerak, Werner.

Call to Order

Prof. Joseph Ferrell, Secretary of the Faculty, called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. He introduced the Chair of the Board of Trustees, Anne Wilmoth Cates.

Greetings from the Board of Trustees

Mrs. Cates brought greetings to the Faculty Council from the Board of Trustees. She reassured the faculty that the Board is attentive to the special concerns of the faculty. She said that the Board’s first priorities this year are to support and introduce the University’s new chancellor, and to work for voter approval of the University Bond Issue. A year ago when interviewing the candidates for chancellor, the Board listened very carefully to the voices of the faculty. The chancellor selected has had experiences at four public universities: South Carolina, Pennsylvania, Kansas, and Nebraska. The Board also urged President Molly Broad to permit our chancellor to represent The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill at meetings of the American Association of Universities, a prerogative that has been claimed by the president since consolidation of The University in the 1930s. President Broad agreed to that request. Consequently, our new chancellor will represent UNC-CH at the AAU meeting in Chicago in September. Mrs. Cates then presented to the faculty the ninth chancellor of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, James Moeser.

Chancellor’s Remarks

Chancellor James Moeser said he was grateful for the support of the Board of Trustees. He said it was important that the flagship campus of the University System had the opportunity of being represented at the AAU and he thanked the Board of Trustees and President Broad for the honor.

The Chancellor spoke of his belief that shared governance is an important institutional value to which he is committed. Since his selection in April, he has immersed himself in the history of this institution. An obvious question is why the University of North Carolina came to be so preeminent when it is but one of many public institutions. One of the clear answers to that question has been the historic role that the faculty has played in Carolina’s development and governance and its loyalty to the institution in times of deprivation and crisis. “Only together,” he said, “can we take this great institution further down the path of excellence.”

Having had prior experience at four other institutions, Chancellor Moeser said that he has found here at Carolina something tangibly different and better about the atmosphere of this institution. There is a remarkable pride of place and dedication to public service that is almost of a spiritual nature. There is a sense here that the University exists for a greater purpose. Frank Porter Graham put it this way: the enemies that the University has been sent to defeat are ignorance and poverty. That social construct is still very strong here. He has seen this already forming in the students who attended Freshman Camp. “I have seen enthusiasm elsewhere,” he said, “but not such enthusiasm linked with a sense of purpose.” At the same time, we must not be so in love with the past that we are blind to our flaws.

The Chancellor said he has been often asked whether he intends to initiate major resource reallocation here as he did at Nebraska and South Carolina. The answer is no, because the context here is completely different. At those institutions, his assessment was that there were some areas of insipient strength that needed to be supported. They were surrounded by other areas of marginal quality. The only way an institution of that nature can attain national stature is to be very targeted and deliberate in planning to move a limited number of programs up to national quality. Our objective at this campus is entirely different. We should subscribe to the goal of being the best public institution in the United States and that means having no areas of weakness. We will not be content with programs that are marginal. Anything that we do at this University should be carried out at the highest level of excellence or we should not be doing it at all. The good news is that he sees no program areas here that are causes for concern. If there are such areas, his strategy would be the opposite of that he employed at Nebraska and South Carolina, i.e., he would move resources to programs that need shoring up rather than writing them off.

The thing that has impressed him most about Carolina is the faculty. Even in the face of sorely inadequate physical facilities, in some instances, it is amazing to see what is being accomplished here and exhilarating to think of the potential for accomplishment if those inadequacies were to be remedied. That is perhaps the strongest argument we can make for passage of the higher education bond issue. “It will be the key that opens the lock to the first decade of the new century.” The bond issue is the first step in achieving our goal of being the best public university in the nation. The second will be a capital campaign which should triple the people’s investment in the campus. This will empower a renaissance of the physical and spiritual culture of the campus, leading to academic excellence. He urged the faculty to inform people of the importance of the bond issue.

The chancellor characterized the campus master plan now under development as “visionary.” There are some complex issues to be worked out with the Town of Chapel Hill, and the University wants to be a good neighbor and to work effectively with the Town.

Chancellor Moeser mentioned several other topics briefly. He summarized the status of the searches now underway for the positions of executive vice chancellor and provost, vice chancellor for finance and administration, and vice chancellor for research. The first two searches are nearing completion; the third is just beginning. He is aware of widespread frustration with the State personnel system. He will make this one of his top priorities. Finally, he announced that he has responded favorably to a request by the chair of the faculty and the chair of the Advisory Committee to appoint a joint faculty/administrative committee to do a comprehensive review of tenure procedures and policies.

Prof. Ronald Strauss (Dental Ecology) asked Chancellor Moeser for an update on the plans for the Horace Williams Tract. Chancellor Moeser said there were some issues that had to be worked out with the Town of Chapel Hill. What is being proposed for the land is a mixed use, a set of villages, set in a park, surrounded by a green space. There are no plans to move any of the core functions from the main campus. Prof. Donna LaFebvre (Political Science) asked if the faculty would have the opportunity for some input into the plan. Chancellor Moeser said there would be.

Professor LeFebvre also asked if there would be any admissions programs to attract Latino students. Chancellor Moeser said the University would be giving great attention to diversity, with regard to both faculty and students.

Prof. Philip Bromberg (Medicine) asked the Chancellor how he saw the University’s relationship to distance learning and the ability of the faculty to participate in entrepreneurial activities outside regular University duties. Chancellor Moeser said that distance learning was going to be very important and the University would not want to be left out. He also said that Web technology could easily be used for distance learning, and the University should respond where the needs are.

Prof. Noelle Granger (Cell Biology and Anatomy) asked if attention is being given to enrollment growth in the graduate programs. Chancellor Moeser said the anticipated growth of between 2,500 and 3,000 students over the next eight years will be a mix of both undergraduate and graduate students.

Presentation of the Hettleman Awards

Chancellor Moeser announced the winners of this year’s Hettleman Awards, for outstanding young faculty, who themselves symbolized the aspirations of excellence of the entire faculty in advancing the frontiers of knowledge and understanding across a broad range of disciplines. They are Assistant Professor Michael D. Harris (Art History), Associate Professor Eric Muller (School of Law), Assistant Professor David Pfennig (Biology), and Assistant Professor Otto Zhou (Physics & Astronomy).

Installation of the Chair of the Faculty

Prof. Joseph Ferrell, Secretary of the Faculty, inducted Prof. Sue Estroff into the office of Chair of the Faculty and presented her with a gavel constructed from wood retrieved from Old East and believed to be part of the original 1793 structure.

Chair of the Faculty’s Remarks

Professor Estroff, garbed in her Faculty Council “power shirt” of blue sequins, said that during her term of office, she hopes to begin conversations in three areas:

1. The Academy

  • The passion for teaching and research among the faculty is important
  • The post-tenure review process needs to be examined
  • Consideration of the intellectual and professional climate in the graduate schools
  • The Task Force on Grading Standards recently mandated by the Council will be chaired by Prof. Beverly Long Communication Studies)

2. The Campus as a workplace

  • Benefits for staff and faculty should be examined by both staff and faculty representatives
  • Improving relationships with the Board of Trustees, and inviting them to see the work that is done in the classes
  • Transportation and parking
  • Examining the review process for senior administrators

3. The University as a social community

  • Issues of diversity and multi-culturalism on campus, one being the breaking of ground for the Stone Center
  • The need to clarify University/corporate relations
  • Parents of students, and the Parents’ Council and relationships with the faculty
  • Relations with the General Assembly

Greetings from the President of the Student Body

Professor Estroff introduced Robert Bradley Matthews, Jr., Class of 2001, President of the Student Body.

Mr. Matthews said he appreciated this opportunity to live out every student’s dream—to give a lecture to the faculty. He said that faculty members may not realize that students are extremely interested in what the faculty is doing. “We are a bit intimidated to ask you about that,” he said. In a recent series of focus groups, students who are not active in student government were asked what they expected from their education. Consistently, one response emerged: we want better relationships with the faculty; we want to know what you are like, what your lives have been like, and how you came to acquire all that knowledge. He urged the faculty to get to know students outside the classroom. He concluded by introducing Joshua Bosin, who will be the student liaison to the Faculty Council this year.

Greetings from the Chair of the Employee Forum

Joanne Kucharski, Chair of the Employee Forum, described the Forum. It is composed of 45 elected delegates representing nine groups of job classifications, serving two-year terms. The officers serve one-year terms. The delegates are all volunteers, and serve on many University committees. The mission is to address employee concerns and to work together with the faculty and administration. One of the most important areas in which the faculty and staff can work effectively together is on issues of health insurance and other benefits.

Open Discussion of Topics Raised by Council Members

Prof. Ronald Hyatt, Faculty Marshal, urged the faculty to participate in the upcoming University Day activities.

Professor Estroff asked the members of the Faculty Council to bring a member of their departments to a meeting of the Faculty Council during the year.

Prof. Robert Adler (Business) asked how people would get between the campus and the Horace Williams Tract. The Chancellor replied that this is being addressed.

Prof. Richard Pfaff (History) pointed out that virtually the entire campus will become a construction site for a very long time if the bond issue passes. This means, of course, that the daily lives of a whole generation of students will be affected in ways that are now only dimly perceived. He hoped that the chancellor would bear this in mind and seek to find ways to ameliorate the inevitable disruption to the maximum feasible extent.

Prof. Lee Graves (Pharmacology) said that pedestrian crossing signs are not being observed and more stringent enforcement efforts are needed. He also raised the issue of the safety of those who use parking facilities late at night. Professor Estroff agreed that the faculty do not have satisfactory means for safe passage to and from parking areas at night. She pointed out that construction activity exacerbates conditions that are already risky for pedestrians. She hopes the faculty will keep bringing these issues to the attention of the administration.

Prof. Gerald Bolas (Ackland Art Museum) acknowledged the problems that new construction will present, but he emphasized that the master plan brings to us a vision of what the campus could be twenty-five years from now.

Prof. Noelle Granger (Cell Biology and Anatomy) asked if there had been any consideration of prioritization of the various projects that will eventually be built with bond issue proceeds. Chancellor Moeser said a lot of work has already been done and the process is ongoing.

Faculty Council Expectations and Procedures

Prof. Ferrell reviewed with Council members expectations of membership and procedures for excused absences and such. He concluded with a brief overview of parliamentary procedure.

Memorial Resolutions

Prof. Peter Ornstein (Psychology) presented a Memorial Resolution for Harriet L. Rheingold, Professor Emerita of Psychology.

Prof. Richard Kinnaird (Art) presented a Memorial Resolution for Robert A. Howard, Professor Emeritus of Art.

Annual Report of the Faculty Grievance Committee

Prof. John Schopler (Psychology) presented the annual report of the Faculty Grievance Committee. Professor Estroff asked if the number of inquiries last year was unusually large and if there was any particular pattern or recurrent theme. Professor Schopler said they were evenly divided and he did not think that 14 or 15 was particularly high. The report was received.

Resolution 2000-12. Amending the Faculty Code

Prof. Ferrell presented Resolution 2000-12 entitled “Amending the Faculty Code to Allow Faculty in Phased Retirement, If Otherwise Qualified, to Serve on All Faculty Committees and as Secretary of the Faculty.” The amendment is recommended by the Committee on University Government. On April 28, 2000, the Council adopted Resolution 2000-5 which requested the Board of Trustees to remove from the tenure regulations a provision that required members of the Faculty Hearings Committee to have permanent tenure. That provision, which is now incorporated in our Faculty Code, has the effect of requiring a member of the Hearings Committee who enters phased retirement to resign from the committee. The trustees have now removed that requirement from the tenure regulations. Instead, the regulations require that members of the Hearings Committee have permanent tenure “when elected.” Thus, faculty members in phased retirement are not eligible for election to the Hearings Committee but will be able to complete a current term. Resolution 2000-12 amends the Faculty Code to incorporate this change in the tenure regulations. The resolution also changes a provision that now requires the secretary of the faculty to have permanent tenure. The proposal is to simply drop that requirement and trust the judgment of the Advisory Committee (who nominates) and the Council (who elects) as to the qualifications expected of the secretary of the faculty.

Resolution 2000-12 was adopted unanimously on first reading. As required by the Faculty Code, it must be adopted a second time before taking effect. That will be put to a vote at the October meeting of the General Faculty. The full text of Resolution 2000-12 will be found on the Faculty Governance website.

Call for Nominations for Teaching Awards

Prof. Celia Hooper (Medical Allied Health Professions) urged the faculty to make nominations for teaching awards.

Other Business

Chancellor Moeser announced that he has asked the Provost to review the policies in place for periodic review of deans and vice chancellors.


The business of the day having concluded, the Council adjourned at 4:48 p.m.


Joseph S. Ferrell
Secretary of the Faculty


Pdf of meeting materials

Print Friendly, PDF & Email