Resolutions 1985-1986

Table of Contents

Archived 1985-1986 Resolutions

Resolution 1985-1986-1 Student Appeal Procedure for Review of Academic Action Taken by an Instructor

The following assumptions underlie this motion:

Students are entitled to a fair, prompt and open resolution of complaints.
Faculty members are entitled to a fair, prompt and open forum in defense of their actions.
Resolution of student appeals should be resolved as speedily and as informally as possible.
The University as an institution, and its faculty are entitled to procedures which ensure the maintenance of academic standards.
The appropriate forum for discussion or alteration of academic matters should be primarily in the academic unit affected.

Each of the following recommendations are proposed as a student appeals procedure.

The existing university-wide committee option and all other appeal options listed in The Golden Rule, which involve student allegations of inappropriate or wrongful academic actions taken by an instructor shall be terminated. (These items occur under FAC Rule 6C7-5.03 and 6C7-5.042 and are listed on page 11(2)3, and page 71, III of The Golden Rule).
Each college shall establish an Academic Appeals committee.

There shall be at least three tenured faculty members of the college on the committee. There shall be at least two students chosen from among the Student Senators of the College.
the members of the Academic Appeals Committee shall be appointed by the Dean at the beginning of the academic year and they shall serve for staggered two-year terms.

All student complains or allegations of wrongful academic actions should first be brought to the attention of the instructor of the course. This involves an individual student complaint about a specific academic action or actions. The parties should attempt to resolve the problem in as speedy and satisfactory a manner as possible. If the student is dissatisfied with the instructor’s decision, the student should proceed to attempt a resolution. The problem should be channeled through the offices of the Chairperson of the Department in which the course is housed. If requested by the Chairperson, the student shall submit in writing the allegation or complaint and the proposed remedy that is sought. The student should file the complaint within one semester of the alleged violation of rights, or as soon as he/she is aware of the violation. The Chairperson and instructor should make every effort with the student to resolve the problem at this level. If the student complaint or allegation is made against the Chairperson in his/her role as an instructor, the student should immediately proceed to make the complaint known to the Office of the Dean, if the resolution is not worked out in discussions with the Chairperson.
If the instructor is not available to discuss the problem, if at all possible, the resolution of the complaint should wait until such time as the instructor can return to campus. The instructor may, in writing, designate a representative to seek a resolution on his/her behalf. If an emergency situation arises such that a complaint must be resolved prior to the availability of the instructor, e.g. in a case of probably delayed graduation, the Chairperson of the department shall make every effort to contact the instructor and apprise him/her of the situation. The instructor may elect to send a written statement to the Chairperson of the Department in which the course is housed and to designate a representative to speak on his/her behalf. If the instructor cannot be reached or does not elect to designate a representative and the complaint must be dealt with promptly, then the Chairperson shall render a decision within fifteen days of notice of the student complaint, unless it is agreed to all parties to delay a decision.
If the student is not satisfied with the resolution of the complaint proposed by the Chairperson or instructor, the student may proceed within fifteen days of the Chairperson’s decision to file a written complaint with the Office of the Dean of the College in which the course is housed. Before filing the complaint, the student should consult with the Dean of Students, or his/her designee, who shall advise the student of his/her rights and responsibilities with respect to the Academic Appeal Procedure. The appeal notice shall state the basis of the complaint, the proposed remedy that is sought, and the dates when the instructor and/or Chairperson met with the student to discuss the problem and suggested resolution.
The Dean, if unable to effect a resolution, shall call the Academic Appeals Committee together and ascertain the availability of the instructor as per (4) above.
The student and the instructor shall be permitted to have a representative to appear before the committee if they so choose. If the student has legal counsel, the University shall provide legal counsel for the faculty member, without charge, at the discretion of the faculty member.
Time limits specified in the review procedure may be extended by mutual agreement of the parties. In conducting a formal review, the Student Appeals Committee should adhere to the following guidelines:

The Appeals Committee will function as an objective, fact-finding body when examining all available and relevant information concerning the student’s appeal of an academic action taken by an instructor. Such information will include the student’s written appeal, written and/or oral information provided by the instructor, statements made by both parties during the committee’s review meeting, and any other information the committee may deem relevant. The committee will not be officially convened to review the appeal until the faculty member involved has received a copy of the appeal and has had at least five days to submit, if desired, any information. The student will be provided a copy of any written material submitted by the instructor.
The Appeals Committee should make every effort to meet for review of the case within fifteen days after receipt of the student’s appeal and any information provided by the faculty member.
The student and faculty member will be invited to meet with the committee. Each party will be allowed adequate time to respond to questions from committee members and to present additional information needed to clarify the issued involved. After meeting with each party, the committee should develop its recommendations. (The Chairperson will designate a member to record the committee’s recommendations.) If consensus cannot be reached, recommendations must be agreed upon by a majority of the committee’s members.
The Appeals Committee must submit within 10 work days after its meeting written recommendations to the Dean concerning disposition of the appeal. The Dean in rendering his decision will make copies of the Appeals Committee’s recommendations available to the parties concerned and to the Provost.

If the student is dissatisfied with the decision of the Dean, he/she may within fifteen days of the decision, file a written request for review to the Provost. The request for review shall state the basis for the review and the resolution sought by the student.
The Provost shall, within fifteen days of receipt of the student’s request for review, make a final decision on the matter. A copy of the written decision and the basis for the decision, shall be sent to the student, the Dean, the College, the Chairperson, and the instructor.
A description of the Student Academic Appeals Procedure shall be placed in the Faculty Handbook and The Golden Rule.

Approved by the Faculty Senate on October 17, 1985.

Resolution 1985-1986-2 Univeristy Support in Administering Make-up Examinations
(Defeated)

Whereas no facilities or personnel are available at the academic department level to support faculty in administering make-up examinations, the Faculty Senate requests that sufficient personnel and adequate space be assigned the University Counseling and Testing Center to provide a centralized location and procedure for administering make-up examinations.

Defeated by the Faculty Senate on November 7, 1985.

Resolution 1985-1986-3 Faculty Hires

The hiring of tenure-earning, tenured, or continuing faculty in a department (or academic unit) shall not be done without the advice and consent of the tenured and tenure-earning faculty of the department (or of the department unit) in which the hiring is to take place.

Each department (or unit) shall establish a procedure to conduct a search for new faculty hires. Each department (or unit) shall establish a procedure by which the tenured and tenure-earning faculty shall provide specific input via a vote or other faculty approved mechanism on a recommendation for the hiring of tenured- tenure-earning or continuing faculty.

Approved by the Faculty Senate on November 7, 1985.
Approved by Provost Leslie Ellis on November 13, 1985.

Resolution 1985-1986-4 Amend Faculty Senate By-Law

Amend Bylaw 1.1 to read as follows:

Voting 1.1 – Each senator shall have one vote according to 3.9.7 of the Constitution where the method of voting will be determined by the presiding office in the form of Viva Voice (Voice Vote), a show of hands, or secret ballot.

Approved by the Faculty Senate on December 5, 1985.

Resolution 1985-1986-5 Establish a UCF Faculty Club

It is the sense of the Faculty Senate that the University of Central Florida should commence a planning and development program for a University Faculty Club.

A joint Faculty-Administration committee should be established to promulgate a plan for the development of a Faculty Club.

The committee shall have no more than seven members, of whom a majority shall be full-time faculty members appointed by the Senate Chair.
The committee will report back to the Faculty Senate prior to April 1, 1986 with a plan for the establishment of a Faculty Club with the location to be on the main campus or the adjacent research park.
The committee plan will include a statement of preliminary funding estimates and estimates of faculty and professional staff monetary and professional staff monetary commitments necessary to go forward with the development of a Faculty Club. The committee plan will also include a statement of the necessary commitments from the university administration if the Faculty Club is to be realized.
The Faculty Senate shall vote on the recommendations of the committee.

Approved by the Faculty Senate on December 5, 1985.
Committee Appointed.

Resolution 1985-1986-6 Amend Faculty Senate Constitution

The Faculty Senate recommends that the Faculty Constitution be amended in Section 3.1 “The Faculty Senate Responsibilities” to read as follows:

3.1Responsibilities. The Faculty Senate shall address itself to academic matters which concern more than one college and to general educational policies. The Faculty Senate is the basic legislative body of the University. As the elected body of the Faculty Assembly, the Faculty Senate may formulate its opinion upon any subject of interest to the University and adopt appropriate resolutions. Resolutions addressing those areas of authority legally reserved to the President and the Board of Regents would be advisory in nature only.

Each resolution made by the Faculty Senate is forwarded to the Vice President for Academic Affairs who shall act upon the recommendation within 60 days. The Vice President of Academic Affairs shall have veto power over any action by the Senate. The veto with rationale shall be communicated in writing to the Secretary of the Senate and to the Chairperson of the Faculty Senate. If the Vice President of Academic Affairs does not act within 60 days, this shall be considered a veto. The Senate, by a two-thirds majority vote, may appeal to the President any action so vetoed.

A subsequent veto by the President shall be communicated in writing to the Secretary of the Senate and to the Chairperson of the Faculty Senate. If the President does not act within 60 days, this shall be considered a veto. The Senate, by a two-thirds majority vote, may appeal to the Board of Regents any action so vetoed.

Approved by the Faculty Senate on April 3, 1986.
Approved by the Faculty Assembly on April 3, 1986.
Transmitted to President Trevor Colbourn on April 7, 1986.
Approved by President Colbourn on April 18, 1986.

Resolution 1985-1986-7 Faculty Senate Secretary

The Faculty Senate shall have a minimum of a half-time career service secretary.

Approved by the Faculty Senate on January 16, 1986.

Resolution 1985-1986-8 Promotion Factors to be considered for Assistant Professors who were Tenured as of Fall 1978-1979

Whereas, the University of Central Florida is a dynamic institution that has purposefully shifted its mission within the last few years from a primary concern and focus on undergraduate education, to a broadened concern with an emphasis on research and graduate education, as well as undergraduate education. In the context of this altered mission the expectations of faculty performance for promotion and tenure have also shifted. This shift, especially as emphasized in the promotion and tenure criteria established during the 1984-1985 academic year, reflects the growth and dynamism of the University. There are, however, individuals who have built their careers at U.C.F. on the expectation of an emphasis on teaching. These individuals were hired, evaluated and continuously employed at the University on the basis of a teaching emphasis. In order to maintain the effectiveness and the continued commitment of these individuals to the University their particular contribution and strengths must be given recognition.

Therefore, be it resolved that faculty members who were in tenure earning positions during the fall quarter of the 1978-1979 academic year may be considered for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor on the following basis:

they shall demonstrate excellence in teaching and have made a substantial contribution in the area of service to the University or have a substantial contribution in scholarly or creative activity within their discipline.

Approved by the Faculty Senate on February 6, 1986.
Transmitted to Provost Leslie Ellis on February 7, 1986.
Approved by Provost Ellis on February 18, 1986:

“I have some reservations about this resolution as did many of our colleagues in the Senate even though it passed on a majority vote in the February 6, 1986 Senate meeting. The implications and potential damage the resolution could have on the established promotion policy of the University must be taken into account. As a result, I will forward the resolution to Associate Vice President Frank Juge and ask him to work with Drs. Micarelli and Trefonas to develop a program for our consideration to address the problem of promotion for Assistant Professors of long standing tenure. The program should be available on a voluntary basis, be individualized and provide special assistance to those who take advantage of it to allow them, within a reasonable period of time, to successfully negotiate the promotion process. Since the text of the resolution differs only slightly in emphasis from existing criteria, participating faculty will be provided the opportunity to elect to follow existing criteria or the new criteria (the latter to become effective August 2, 1986) for promotion consideration.”

Resolution 1985-1986-9 Parking

The University shall set aside extended reserve parking spaces in each B parking area which shall be no less than the total number of evening classes taught in the buildings which are serviced by these areas. These designated parking areas shall remain closed to student parking until 8:00 p.m. Monday through Thursday.

Approved by the Faculty Senate on February 6, 1986.
Transmitted to Provost Leslie Ellis on February 7, 1986.
Approved by Provost Ellis on February 18, 1986.

Resolution 1985-1986-10 Faculty Evaluations

Faculty member annual evaluations relative to research shall take into consideration, when appropriate, lack of administration financial support to meet generally accepted levels of scholastic research. The chairman, or head of a department or unit, shall include an entry in faculty member evaluations stating whether the faculty member had sufficient financial support to enable him to perform at an acceptable level in research or creative activities and where reasonable efforts have been made to secure additional resources. This shall be considered in the annual evaluation of faculty performance.

Approved by the Faculty Senate on February 6, 1986.
Transmitted to Provost Leslie Ellis on February 7, 1986.
Approved by Provost Ellis on February 18, 1986:

I would like to make some editorial changes in this resolution for clarification purposes. In the resolution as sent to me in your memo of 7 February in the third line from the bottom, replace the third word “where” with “if” and insert “by faculty” between the words “made” and “to secure”; in the penultimate line, replace the word “additional” with “external”. The resolution would then read (deleted words have been struck over and new words underlined):

Faculty member annual evaluations relative to research shall take into consideration, when appropriate, lack of administration financial support to meet generally accepted levels of scholastic research. The chairman, or head of a department or unit, shall include an entry in faculty member evaluations starting whether the faculty member had sufficient financial support to enable him to perform at an acceptable level in research or creative activities and where if reasonable efforts have been made by faculty to secure additional external resources. This shall be considered in the annual evaluation of faculty performance.

It seems clear that the intent of the resolution is to assure that additional reasonably encompassing information concerning research be provided in the annual evaluation of faculty. It is in this spirit that I accept the resolution. The promotion forms will be modified to incorporate the additional information.

Resolution 1985-1986-11 Add/Drop Period
(Not Approved)

Whereas, The current Add/Drop period is held during the first week of each semester; and

Whereas, Course instructors may assign homework or administer course quizzes during the first week of the semester; and

Whereas, Students who add a class are held responsible for work missed in the course and may not be given an opportunity to make up missed assignments or quizzes;

Be it Resolved, That the Faculty Senate of the University of Central Florida recommends that the University’s Add/Drop period be completed before classes begin for the semester.

Be it Further Resolved, That students be advised that the first week of a semester is as important for the successful completion of a course as any other. Failure to attend class meetings early in the semester will lower their chance for academic success in the course.

Approved by the Faculty Senate March 6, 1986.
Returned by Provost Ellis on March 24, 1986:

I have examined Resolution 85-86-11 passed by the Faculty Senate on March 6. I certainly understand the faculty’s concern over the duration of the add/drop period and its effect on the first week of classes. I recognize that the time allotted to instruction must be utilized to the fullest in order to bring about quality education. I have asked Dr. Charles N. Micarelli to assemble the Ad Hoc Committee on Registration and Add/Drop to examine the Faculty Senate’s proposal. This Committee was organized recently by Dr. Micarelli to resolve problems stemming from registration and is making progress in simplifying the process.

The adoption of the Senate’s resolution would affect students greatly and I feel they should have input on this question. The students on the Ad Hoc Committee for Registration and Add/Drop can provide this input. I have asked Dr. Micarelli to call a meeting of his committee in the week following spring break. The Senate’s resolution will affect several areas of the University and as such requires some deliberation and input from those affected. Rest assured that you will receive a decision on this matter before the termination of this semester.

Provost Ellis update on April 24, 1986.

Dr. Micarelli held that meeting and the Committee proposed that a university-wide Add/Drop be held only on Monday and Tuesday of the first week of classes with a special Add/Drop on Thursday and Friday just for those students who have a Wednesday or Thursday night class.

Resolution 1985-1986-12 Carry Concealed Weapons on Campus

Whereas, campus safety is a concern of all employees and students; and

Whereas, the carrying of concealed weapons on campus is inconsistent with the goal of cmapus safety,

Be it Resolved, that the University of Central Florida Faculty Senate strongly urges each member of the Florida Senate and the Florida House to vote against the over-ride of the Governor’s veto of SB 661.

Approved by the Faculty Senate March 6, 1986.
Transmitted to Provost Leslie Ellis on March 13, 1986.
Approved by Provost Ellis on March 17, 1986.

Resolution 1985-1986-13 Creation of Faculty Senate Computer Use on Campus Committee

WHEREAS the academic programs of the University of Central Florida should provide the maximum opportunity for all faculty and students to benefit from all available resources of the university on an equitable basis and,

WHEREAS the goal of the university is to provide quality education and the opportunity to learn and benefit from the latest technological advancements of society both to improve student and faculty skills and to increase the market-ability of our students,

BE IT RESOLVED that a committee will be named to study computer use on campus. It will be appointed by the Chairperson of the faculty senate and charged to collect data, including budgetary information, and to study and report back to the senate by the fall, 86 semester on needs, costs and possible alternative funding/cost options as well as other means of attaining better access for faculty research and class training and other use arrangements.

Approved by the Faculty Senate March 27, 1986.
Approved by Provost Ellis on April 15, 1986.

Resolution 1985-1986-14 Undergraduate Curriculum Committee GEP Changes

The Faculty Senate recommends that the Provost implement formal procedures to send any changes in the General Education Program (courses or structure) proposed by the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee, to the Faculty Senate 90 days prior to taking action. Final action will then be taken after considering the recommendations of both bodies (Undergraduate Curriculum Committee and Faculty Senate).