March 26, 2004
Meeting of the General Faculty and the Faculty Council
Friday, March 26th 2004 at 3:00 p.m.
Room 2601 at the School of Government
Chancellor James Moeser and Professor Judith Wegner, Chair of the Faculty, will preside.
3:00 General Faculty and Faculty Council Convene.
- Introductory Remarks and Questions from the Floor: Chancellor Moeser.
- Remarks: Provost Robert Shelton.
- Remarks from the Chair of the Faculty: Professor Wegner.
3:20 Resolution 2004-6 On Intellectual Integrity and Independence.
- Professor Andrew Perrin, on behalf of the Agenda Committee.
3:35 Resolution 2004-7 Amending the Faculty Code of University Government as it Relates to Various Representatives of the Faculty.
- Professor Elizabeth Gibson, Chair, University Governance Committee.
3:45 Resolution 2004-8 Supporting Participation in the Coalition on Intercollegiate Athletics and Accompanying Memorandum
- Professor Lissa Broome, Chair, Faculty Athletics Committee.
4:00 Annual Report of Buildings and Grounds Committee.
- Professor David Godschalk.
4:10 Faculty Forum: Panel on Information Technology and Related Topics.
- Policy Issues and Information Technology: Jeanne Smythe, Director of Computing Policy, Academic Technology and Networks.
- Teaching and Research: Professor James Noblitt (Annual Report of the Faculty Information Technology Advisory Committee).
- Copyright: Professor Jack Semonche (Annual Report of the University Committee on Copyright).
Joseph S. Ferrell
Secretary of the Faculty
The General Faculty and Faculty Council of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill convened at 3:00 p.m.at theKnapp-Sanders Building, home of the School of Government.
The following 53 members of the Council attended: Adimora, Bouldin, Colindres, Conover, de Silva, Elvers, Foley, Frampton, Gerber, Gollop, Granger, Howell, Klebanow, Kramer, Langbauer, Leonard, Malizia, Martin, McGraw, Mesibov, Miguel, Miller, Orthner, Pardun, Perelmuter, Perrin, Reisner, Renner, Rock, Rogers, Rowan, Sawin, Schauer, Shea, Simpson, Jay Smith, John Smith, Straughan, Strauss, Tauchen, Tobin, Toews, Tresolini, Tulloch, Vick, Wallace, Watson, Wilson, Winkler, Wolford, Yankaskas, and Yopp. The following 33 members were granted excused absences: Ammerman, Anton,Arnold, Bachenheimer, Bane, Bowen,Cairns, Elter, Givre, Gulledge, Heenan, Holditch-Davis, Holmgren, Kagarise, Kjervik, Lohr, Molina, Morris-Natschke, Muller, Nicholas, Nonini, Owen, Parikh, Pisano, Pittman,Poole,Porto, Rippe, Salmon, Slavick, Vandermeer, Weinberg, and Willis. The following member was absent without excuse: Lin.
Associate Dean Thomas Thornburg welcomed the faculty to Knapp-Sanders.
Chancellor Moeser confined his remarks to a statement in response to a recent incident in which a lecturer’s email to her class, in which she rebuked a student by name for certain words spoken in class, had become a matter of widespread controversy. He began by stating his support for the resolution entitled “On Intellectual Integrity andIndependence” to be considered alter on the agenda. A transcript of the chancellor’s remarks follows.
Clearly among students and faculty we are seeing increased interest regarding expressions reflecting a diversity of viewpoints in our daily campus life. This is a phenomenon by no means unique toNorth Carolina. It is a national trend. It is a subject of discussion at national meetings of faculty and academic leaders.
It is natural that we should be having these conversations here in Chapel Hill, where we have been in the spotlight, indeed at the eye of the storm, since our creation in 1793. Our university’s history has been marked by the yeast of democracy, and we are very proud of that. The discussion we are having is all to the good. It goes to our core values as a university. It is embedded in our genetic code. The great traditions that we have here with respect to academic freedom—the university as a free marketplace of ideas—are why we exist.
Our main responsibility is to remain a vibrant intellectual community in which all viewpoints can be comfortably expressed and heard in an atmosphere of civility and respect. Our charge is to maintain an open atmosphere, one in which unpopular or controversial ideas may be expressed and heard—but also challenged—without fear of retribution. The primary role of a university is not to espouse a point of view, but rather to provide a platform for the expression of all points of view. Those of us within the university community are not always going to agree among ourselves about the issues of the day, but we must defend the rights of those who have opposing views. That is the role of our academy, and, indeed that is our responsibility as citizens under the Constitution.
Some would argue that some ideas are so hurtful, so harmful, that we should not permit them to be expressed. But any effort to declare a particular point of view off-limits, in my view, is not consistent with our values as a totally free and open institution. The better approach is to encourage speech on all matters—all points of view. We should not suppress any viewpoint, but we should require intellectual rigor. We will not treat any member of our community unfairly and we will affirm the value of all members of our community. While we will vigorously enforce the university’s non-discrimination and anti-harassment policies, we will not restrict free expression on this campus.
It is appropriate for me to update the faculty on one specific issue. We have been notified that the Office of Civil Rights and the U.S. Department of Education will conduct a compliance review of the university. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the university’s compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex. This review is the result of concerns about a class email sent by a lecturer in the Department of English.
I believe the response by the chair of the Department of English, and the university, was both timely and appropriate, tempered, and measured. The chair has my full support. We will cooperate fully with the Office of Civil Rights.
In this regard, I want the Council to know about one positive movement forward in implementing a key recommendation of the Chancellor’s Task Force for a Better Workplace. We are creating an ombuds office to provide a venue in which job-related concerns by faculty and staff can be expressed. The office will consist of a full-time staff member and a part-time faculty member. This office is consistent with our desire to ensure that the concept of fair play is alive and well on this campus.
Serving at a public university, we all have a special responsibility to vigorously protect the right of everyone to be heard. Civil discourse is a core value at Carolina. The university’s proper role is to increase knowledge and understanding. Light andLiberty—Lux Libertas.
Provost Robert Shelton briefed the Council on the status of searches for senior administrative officers, reported on the status of budget development, and reported on the Board of Governors’ actions on campus-based tuition increases.
Prof. Judith Wegner, Chair of the Faculty, reported that the response rate to the survey on faculty retention was 49.6%.
Prof. Andrew Perrin (Sociology), on behalf of the Agenda Committee, introduced a resolution entitled “On Intellectual Integrity and Independence.” He said that the resolution responds to two primary concerns: (1) the ongoing perception of political bias on the part of the faculty—which does not exist in fact, and (2) the sense of the part of various political actors that free speech has no appropriate boundaries; that so-called viewpoints that violate basic norms of decency must necessarily stand unchallenged by the faculty because all viewpoints are assumed to be equally valid. Prof. Perrin perfected the wording of the fifth introductory recital, and on suggestion of Prof. Wendy Wolford (Geography), the order paragraphs 2 and 3 of the resolution was reversed.
The resolution was adopted and is enrolled as Resolution 2004-6. See Appendix A.
Prof. Elizabeth Gibson, chair of the Faculty Committee on University Government, introduced a resolution entitled “Amending the Faculty Code of University Government as it Relates to Various Representatives of the Faculty.” Prof. Gibson explained that the resolution adds provisions to the Code concerning the faculty athletic representative and the faculty marshal, and moves existing provisions concerning the Faculty Assembly Delegation to a new location. She said that the provision relating to the faculty athletic representative responds to Resolution 2003-10 adopted June 23, 2003, on behalf of the Council by the Executive Committee of the Faculty Council, and that the provisions relative to the faculty marshal codify the procedure followed by Chancellor Moeser in making an appointment to that office.
The resolution was adopted on first reading as Resolution 2004-7 and remains on the calendar for second reading. See Appendix B.
Prof. Lissa Broome, chair of the Faculty Athletics Committee, introduced a resolution entitled “Supporting Participation in the Coalition on Intercollegiate Athletics.” She explained that the coalition is a group of faculty leaders who are seeking reform of intercollegiate athletics. Beginning in the Pac-10, the coalition spread to include many of the schools in the Bowl Championship Series, and now seeks to involve all Division 1A schools. Prof. Broome reviewed the coalition’s procedures for taking policy positions and noted that approval requires support of two-thirds of the membership.
The resolution was adopted and is enrolled as Resolution 2004-8. See Appendix C.
Prof. David Godschalk, chair of the Buildings and Grounds Committee, presented the committee’s annual report. In response to a question, Prof. Godschalk said that he was completing his service on the committee and would not accept reappointment due to his plans to retire, whereupon the Council expressed its appreciation for his many years of service by standing ovation.
Prof. James Noblitt, chair of the Faculty Information Technology Advisory Committee, presented the committee’s annual report. His PowerPoint presentation is attached to these minutes.
Prof. Jack Semonche, chair of the University Committee on Copyright, presented the committee’s annual report.
Ms. Jeanne Smythe, Director of Computing Policy for the Division of Academic Technology and Networks, briefed the Council on the work of ATN. Her PowerPoint presentation is attached to these minutes.
Its business having been completed, the Council and General Faculty adjourned at5:00 p.m.
Joseph S. Ferrell Secretary of the Faculty
Resolution 2004-6. On Intellectual Integrity and Independence
Whereas, education by its nature requires the open exchange of diverse ideas; and
Whereas, constant, productive, broad, and respectful discourse that transcends the boundaries of discussion available outside the Academy is at the heart of a well-rounded academic institution; and
Whereas, members of the University community at Chapel Hill share a commitment to the pursuit of truth and the dissemination of knowledge to succeeding generations of citizens devoted to the high ideals of respect for the rights of others; and
Whereas, intellectual honesty, trust, respect, and fair treatment between and among faculty and students are essential to secure the benefits of higher learning for a rising generation of citizens, as envisioned at the University’s founding; and
Whereas, the University has long committed itself to principles of intellectual independence, and nondiscrimination on the basis of, among others, race, sex and sexual orientation, and free speech and expression, and
Whereas, principles of fair treatment are embodied in longstanding University policies relating to appointment and promotion and grade assignments, which in each case prohibit actions based on personal malice and discrimination; and
Whereas, longstanding policies of the Board of Governors for the sixteen institutions of The University of North Carolina affirm The University’s support for and encouragement of freedom of inquiry for faculty members and students to the end that they may responsibly pursue their goals of the transmission and advancement of knowledge and understanding through teaching, learning, research, discussion and publication that is free from internal or external restraints that would unreasonably restrict their academic endeavors, and
Whereas, these longstanding policies also affirm that the University “shall protect faculty and students in their responsible exercise of the freedom to teach, to learn, and otherwise to seek and speak the truth” while further stating that faculty and students of The University of North Carolina “shall share in the responsibility for maintaining an environment in which academic freedom flourishes and in which the rights of each member of the academic community are respected,” and
Whereas, the Faculty Council wishes to reiterate its commitment to these principles at a time of growing pressures to politicize and therefore undercut the essential educational process; now therefore
The Faculty Council resolves:
The Faculty Council of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill:
- Reiterates the importance of intellectual integrity and freedom, both in research and in classroom activities;
- Recognizes a distinction between expressing arguments in an open discussion and presenting personal attacks on others, whether they are present in the classroom or not;
- Reiterates its support for the ongoing policy and practice that political affiliation and position are irrelevant to, and not considered in, the processes of hiring, tenure, promotion, or teaching;
- Supports constant and ongoing dialogue on a wide range of issues;
- Supports established and well-known channels for instructors and students to address behavior that falls outside the bounds of reasonable and appropriate discourse;
- Calls on the University administration and all others to protect the integrity of the classroom and the University as a space for safe, respectful difference and dialogue for all those present, within the guidelines of civility, openness, and respect, as well as the boundaries imposed by the curriculum.
Resolution 2004-7. Amending the Faculty Code of University Government as it relates to various representatives of the faculty.
The General Faculty Council resolves:
Section 1. Article 3 of the Faculty Code of University Government is amended to add the indicated language to the title and the following new sections:
OFFICERS AND REPRESENTATIVES OF THE FACULTY
§ 3-3. The faculty marshal. The faculty marshal is appointed by the chancellor from among the voting faculty for a renewable five-year term. In making or renewing an appointment to this position, the chancellor shall seek the advice of the Advisory Committee. The faculty marshal shall assist the chancellor in planning commencement ceremonies, the annual observance of University Day, and other University-wide academic convocations and ceremonies, and shall bear the marshal’s staff at the head of the academic procession on all such occasions.
§ 3-4. The faculty athletics representative. The faculty athletics representative is appointed by the chancellor from among the voting faculty for an indefinite term, subject to formal review at least every five years. In making an appointment to this position or reviewing the incumbent, the chancellor shall follow a process established with the advice and consent of the Advisory Committee. The faculty athletics representative is the University’s voting delegate to the Atlantic Coast Conference and the University’s faculty representative within the National Collegiate Athletic Association. He or she shall make an annual report to the Faculty Council and shall make special reports to the Council from time to time as may be requested by the Agenda Committee.
§ 3-5. Faculty Assembly delegation. (a) The delegation of the General Faculty to the Faculty Assembly of the University of North Carolina is composed of four members elected by the voting faculty and the chair of the faculty or the chair’s designee. The chair of the faculty designates the chair of the delegation. The Committee on University Government may amend the provisions of this paragraph with respect to the number of members of the delegation when required by a change in the number of members of the Faculty Assembly apportioned to the University. Such amendments shall be reported promptly to the secretary of the faculty and by him or her to the General Faculty.
(b) The delegation represents the faculty of the University at the Faculty Assembly of the University of North Carolina and reports to the Faculty Council on matters of interest relating to the Faculty Assembly and actions taken by that body.
Section 2. Sections 4-5 and 4-7 of the Faculty Code of University Government are amended as indicated, and section 4-12 is deleted:
§ 4-5. Advisory Committee. (a) The Advisory Committee consists of nine elected members, the chair of the faculty, the secretary of the faculty, and the chair of the Committee on Appointments, Promotions, and Tenure.
(b) The committee is advisory to the chancellor in any matter deemed important by the chancellor or the committee, and particularly with respect to:
(1)proposed amendments to the trustee policies and procedures governing academic tenure;
(2)review of school and departmental statements of criteria for appointment, promotion, and tenure;
(3)academic program planning and assessment;
(4)appointment of vice chancellors, deans, and other senior administrators;
(5)recommendations for corrective action
(i)pursuant to a report of the Faculty Hearings Committee with respect to a decision not to reappoint a probationary-term faculty member, or
(ii)pursuant to a report of the Faculty Grievance Committee with respect to a decision not to promote to a higher rank a person holding permanent tenure at the rank of associate professor or assistant professor
(6)appointment and renewal of appointment of the faculty marshal and appointment and review of the faculty athletics representative.
§ 4-7. Faculty Athletics Committee. (a) The Faculty Athletics Committee consists of nine members elected by the voting faculty. The
voting delegate to the Atlantic Coast Conferencefaculty athletics representative, if not otherwise an elected member of the Faculty Athletics Committee, is an ex officio member of the committee.
(b) The committee is concerned with informing the faculty and advising the chancellor on any aspect of athletics, including, but not limited to, the academic experience for varsity athletes, athletic opportunities for members of the University community, and the general conduct and operation of the University’s athletic program.
§ 4-12. [Reserved].
Faculty Assembly Delegation. (a) The delegation of the General Faculty to the Faculty Assembly of the University of North Carolina is composed of four members elected by the voting faculty and the chair of the faculty or the chair’s designee. The chair of the faculty designates the chair of the delegation. The Committee on University Government may amend the provisions of this paragraph with respect to the number of members of the delegation when required by a change in the number of members of the Faculty Assembly apportioned to the University. Such amendments shall be reported promptly to the secretary of the faculty and by him or her to the General Faculty. (b) The delegation represents the faculty of the University at the Faculty Assembly of the Unive rsity of North Carolina and reports to the Faculty Council on matters of interest relating to the Faculty Assembly and actions taken by that body.
Section 3. This Resolution shall become effective upon adoption.
Resolution 2004-8. On the Work of the Coalition on Intercollegiate Athletics
The Faculty Council resolves:
The Faculty Council supports the participation of its faculty leaders in the Coalition on Intercollegiate Athletics (COIA) and supports the ongoing national discussion of issues identified by COIA among the partners in intercollegiate athletics, including faculty, administrators, trustees, the NCAA, athletic conferences, and students. We cannot endorse “A Framework for Comprehensive Athletics Reform” (October 2003 version) in all of its particulars. We urge COIA to continue to revise and refine this document in the light of comments and concerns it receives.