Table of Contents
Archived 1996-1997 Resolutions
Resolution 1996-1997-1 Changing “I” grades to “F” grades
Whereas, An “I” grade is intended for incomplete course work that is to be completed later; and
Whereas, Current rules allow for “I” grades that are never changed into a letter grade; and
Whereas, Such use of an “I” grade may amount in practice to a very late withdrawal and therefore constitute an abuse of the intention of the “I” grade;
Be It Resolved that an “I” grade must be changed by the instructor to a letter grade within one calendar year or before the student’s graduation, whichever comes first. If no such change is done, the “I” grade shall automatically become an “F” grade at that time.
Approved by the Faculty Senate on November 21, 1996.
Transmitted to Provost Gary Whitehouse on November 21, 1996.
Approved by Provost Whitehouse on December 30, 1996.
Resolution 1996-1997-2 Tenure
Whereas, the purpose of a great university is to provide educational excellence to its students, to conduct research critical to future development and to serve its community, and
Whereas, tenure is essential for an excellent university to attract and retain the best faculty, making the State University System competitive with other university systems, and is critical in ensuring faculty academic freedom;
Be it resolved that the Board of Regents be commended for its affirmation of the concept of tenure, and
Be it further resolved that the UCF Faculty Senate strongly endorses the concept of accountability of all faculty and believes that a thorough, comprehensive and continuous review of performance currently exists and should be retained. The existing process already includes the review of tenured faculty. The concerns about nonperformance, for which the proposed Post-Tenure Review process is intended, should be dealt with through the existing periodic review process. It is therefore unnecessary to institute a new system of post-tenure review.
We affirm that the faculty accept the responsibility for and should be fully involved in the process of review.
Approved by the Faculty Senate on December 5, 1996.
Transmitted to Provost Gary Whitehouse on December 5, 1996.
Approved by Provost Whitehouse on December 6, 1996.
Resolution 1996-1997-3 General Education Program (GEP)
Whereas, The University’s commitment to diversity and inclusiveness was reiterated in Faculty Senate Resolution 1995-1996-01; and
Whereas, Faculty Senate Resolution 1995-1996-01 resulted in a faculty committee to study inclusion of diversity in curriculum and to further refine the General Education Program to give the University a competitive edge; and
Whereas, There needs to be flexibility at the college, department, and program levels in interpreting the best way to address and implement a diversity requirement; and
Whereas, UCF students have varying General Education Program experiences; and
Whereas, There is currently no faculty committee with exclusive jurisdiction over issues related to “general education” at UCF;
BE IT RESOLVED that the Faculty Senate establish a General Education Oversight Committee as a reporting committee and with exclusive jurisdiction over all issues related to “general education”.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the University establish a “General Education Program Diversity Requirement”. Students must take one of the diversity courses within the General Education Program and approved by the General Education Oversight Committee to satisfy this requirement.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the University establish a “Diversity Graduation Requirement”. This requirement can be satisfied by meeting the “General Education Program Diversity Requirement” OR by activities or courses in a major, or by other courses jointly approved by a program and the General Education Oversight Committee.
FINALLY, BE IT RESOLVED that the University utilize a “learning communities model” by which some students can complete parts of the General Education Program requirements.
Approved by the Faculty Senate on March 20, 1997.
Transmitted to Provost Gary Whitehouse on March 31, 1997.
Approved by Provost Whitehouse on April 15, 1997.
Resolution 1996-1997-4 Formula Funding
Whereas, UCF has recently undergone months of strategic planning, involving scores of people from both inside and outside the University Community, and
Whereas, As faculty we are concerned with both the equity and efficacy of funding for the university’s operating units and programs, as well as with implementation of the strategic plan; and
Whereas, We recognize that implementing the university’s strategic plans depends upon actions taken not just by the central administration, but also at the level of the colleges and operating units as well;
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that, while the Senate supports the use of formula funding for basic, across-the-board distributions in support of the on-going operating activities of the University’s colleges and other units, it also recognizes that strategic initiatives inherent in the University’s strategic plans cannot be pursued entirely through formula-driven funding models.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, accordingly, the Senate urges that processes be developed by which specific initiatives and programs can be funded by means other than through enrollment-driven or other formula-funding approaches. Development of such processes is appropriate for the University wide budget, for the academic affairs budget, and for the budgets of individual colleges and operating units, and might include the refinement and adaptation of the existing practice of providing “specials” within the University-wide and Academic Affairs budgets.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that it is vitally important such processes assure maximum participation by faculty from within their operating units and departments, and that such processes are maximally visible to and understood by all members of the University community. It should be understood also that this resolution does not constitute a lack of support from the faculty for the aims and purposes of formula-based budgeting appropriately employed; rather it suggests enhancement and refinement of such models in order that they may be more effective, equitable, and supportive of the University’s strategic goals.
Approved by the Faculty Senate on April 24, 1997.
Transmitted to Provost Gary Whitehouse on April 28, 1997.
Approved by Provost Whitehouse on June 3, 1997.
Resolution 1996/1997-5 Communication of Budget Process
Whereas, Efforts aimed at re-examining the University’s budget processes are now beginning, and the Senate supports such efforts to synchronize planning and budgeting; and
Whereas, The Senate believes that effective budgeting requires that all units and parties involved in the budget process understand it; and
Whereas, The Senate believes that a spirit of openness regarding budgeting should prevail, not only at the University level but at the level of the colleges and individual academic units as well;
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the Senate urges that the processes and criteria by which budget allocations are made and results thereof, both at the University level and within all colleges and units, should be clearly communicated to all the participants in that process, including faculty at the departmental and program levels.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that to this end, it is recommended that a formal mechanism, or mechanisms, be established for fostering such communication. Such mechanisms should include, but be not necessarily limited to, annual, formal written or oral reporting by the President or Provost to the Faculty Senate, and by similar reporting by the deans and other heads of the various colleges and operating units to their respective faculties.
Approved by the Faculty Senate on April 24, 1997.
Transmitted to Provost Gary Whitehouse on April 28, 1997.
Approved by Provost Whitehouse on June 3, 1997.