NOVEMBER 6, 1995


Senators excused were:        Barbara Curry, Neil Houser, Edward Kerner,
                              John Kraft, Jerome Lewis, Ajay Manrai,
                              Stephanie Oberle, Betty Paulanka, Mary
                              Richards, David Roselle, Tuncay Saydam,
                              Roland Smith, William Stanley, Carolyn

Senators absent were:         Brian Ackerman, Steven Helmling, Christine
                              Heyrman, Bill Lawson, James Magee, Duane
                              Milne, Shawn Phillips, Wendy Samter 


      The agenda was approved as submitted.

      Senator Hildebrandt asked if President Roselle's remarks were to be
      published.  The Secretary of the Senate noted that the semi-annual
      meeting of the Faculty is not part of the proceedings of the Faculty
      Senate and that, therefore, President Roselle's remarks were not
      part of the minutes of the Senate session held on the same day.

      The minutes of the October 2, 1995 Senate meeting were then
      approved as written.


      The Provost had no formal remarks to be made.


      President Hall announced that an open hearing was scheduled by
      the Committee on Undergraduate Studies on the "Granting of
      Permanent Status to the Major in Foreign Languages and
      Literatures," to be held on Thursday, November 16, 1995, at 4:00
      p.m. in 201 McDowell Hall.



      A.    Request from the Committee on Committees and Nominations
            for Senate confirmation of committee appointments.

            The following slate of nominees was approved:

                  Mary Carroll      Member, Library Committee 
                  Mir Islam         Member, Diversity and Affirmative
                  Lesa Griffiths    Member, Student and Faculty Honors
                  Elizabeth Perse   Member, Undergraduate Studies
                  Jerome Brown      Member, Student Life
                  Virginia Redmond  Member, Library Committee
                  Barbara Viera     Member, Student and Faculty Honors
                  James Richards    Member, Graduate Studies
                  Avron Abraham     Member, Undergraduate Studies
      B.    Recommendation from the Committee on Faculty Welfare and
            Privileges regarding a proposed policy on Academic Conflicts
            of Interest.  The resolution read as follows:
                  WHEREAS,          it is essential that conflicts of interest
                                    be avoided in situations where family
                                    members of faculty or persons with
                                    whom faculty members share
                                    consensual amorous relationships
                                    participate in the University as students
                                    or as members themselves of the
                                    faculty or administration, and

                  WHEREAS,          these conflictual situations are likely to
                                    arise in an epoch where such
                                    relationships are frequent, be it
                  RESOLVED,         that the University Faculty Senate
                                    approve and recommend the adoption
                                    of the attached policy ("Academic
                                    Conflicts of Interest"), as forwarded by
                                    the Committee on Faculty Welfare and
                                    Privileges, and be it further

                  RESOLVED,         that, upon approval of the appropriate
                                    officers of administration, the attached
                                    policy ("Academic Conflicts of
                                    Interest") be included in the Faculty
                                    Handbook on page III-57, under Section
                                    III, "Personnel Policies for Faculty," as
                                    a new Subsection X.1, with the current
                                    X.1 becoming X.2 and so on. 

            Senator Bellamy asked if there had been a sufficient number
            of problems which have arisen to warrant such a formal
            policy.  President Hall referred to Professor McInnis,
            Chairperson of the Committee on Faculty Welfare and
            Privileges, to comment.  Professor McInnis assured the Senate
            that there were indeed so many situations in which such
            conflicts might arise, particularly with children and spouses of
            faculty enrolling in courses, that potential conflicts were
            sometimes unavoidable.  The policy was intended to protect
            the faculty member more than anything else.

            When asked if there was a specific problem that prompted the
            policy, Professor McInnis said that there had been no
            complaints, but that Vice Provost Andersen had suggested to
            the Committee that such a policy be written, since across the
            country most institutions are writing such policies and
            including them in their faculty handbooks.
            Vice Provost Andersen remarked that the policy statement
            before the Faculty Senate was some version of what was in
            the National AAUP Handbook.  In her opinion, an important
            point is to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest, that
            students may perceive the presence of a spouse or child in the
            class as a potential conflict.  She confirmed that there had
            been problems in the past.

            Senator Gottfredson stated that it was not clear to her how
            the policy would address such perceptions and asked whether
            the Committee had discussed privacy issues, for example, the
            question of the potential damage which might ensue from a
            requirement that a gay relationship be revealed.  She was
            assured that the Committee did discuss the problem to some
            degree.  It was the Committee's opinion that the issue of
            fairness would override such issues of privacy.  Professor
            McInnis stated that most situations that arise would involve
            open family relationships.

            It was remarked that the policy, as written, would place a
            faculty member in violation of official University policy if such
            a relationship were not revealed.  The suggestion was made
            that a simple public declaration that a student was a son or
            daughter would suffice to remove the conflict.  Vice Provost
            Andersen said that it was her interpretation that the policy
            states that, if you have that relationship with a student, you
            should not be supervising them in class or out-of-class
            instruction.  If that course is the student's only option for
            degree completion, an alternative method of grading must be
            found.  Therefore, simple declarations would be prohibited and
            all potential conflicts of that sort would require alternative
            grading procedures.  Vice Provost Andersen stated that she
            did not take part in the Committee's deliberations, and that
            questions of privacy should probably be referred to them.  
            She further stated that the language is literally out of the
            National AAUP policy document.

            Senator Bonner suggested that the word "should" does not
            carry the force of "shall" or "must" and, as such, could be
            viewed as advice to the faculty on how to handle potentially
            sensitive situations.

            Speaking for the Committee on Faculty Welfare and Privileges,
            Professor McInnis stated that the document was brought to
            the Faculty Senate because there are an increasing number of
            married faculty entering the work force, many of the old
            nepotism rules have been dropped, and that the rest of the
            faculty should be protected from cozy relationships between
            married faculty members in terms of employment.  The policy
            is such that married couples could not vote on each other's
            promotion and so on within a department.

            Senator Hildebrandt suggested an amendment to the wording
            of the policy to state that both real and apparent conflicts of
            interest should be avoided.  Debate on the amendment then
            centered on the advisability of making such a change, the
            interpretation of the word "should," and the problems of
            maintaining objectivity in grading.

            After further discussion, the Faculty Senate voted to return
            the report to the Committee on Faculty Welfare and Privileges
            for further input.
      C.    Recommendation from the Committee on Faculty Welfare and
            Privileges amending the Faculty Handbook relative to
            "Qualifications for Sabbatical Leave."

            The question was raised concerning the policy attributed to
            the Administration, that credit earned toward a sabbatical
            leave did not accumulate until the September following the
            leave period.  After some discussion, Vice Provost Andersen
            commented that the faculty rules, as adopted by the Faculty
            Senate, make that stipulation and that it was not a matter of
            administrative interpretation.  After further discussion, the
            question was called.  The following resolution was passed by
            an overwhelming vote:

                  WHEREAS,          it is standard practice that faculty be
                                    eligible to apply for a sabbatical every
                                    seventh year, and

                  WHEREAS,          the administration now discounts the
                                    Spring semester after a faculty member
                                    returns from a Fall semester sabbatical,
                                    be it therefore

                  RESOLVED,         that the Faculty Handbook, Section III,
                                    "Personnel Policies for Faculty,"
                                    Subsection 6, "Sabbatical Leave,"
                                    paragraph d., page III-40,  be amended
                                    as follows: [New wording is in bold
                                    type and deleted material is in

                              The credit toward a sabbatical leave
                              does not begin to accumulate until the
                              beginning of the next appointment
                              semester [year] after returning from a
                              sabbatical leave.

      D.    Introduction of New Business        

            The President of the Faculty Senate called for any
            further new business.  Senator Bellamy rose to ask if
            there was any truth to the rumor that plans were
            underway to move the Faculty Senate offices to Hullihen
            Hall.  On being informed that the move was indeed being
            planned, Senator Bellamy, after commenting on the
            previous discussion of avoiding the appearance of
            conflict of interest, and in light of the symbolic
            importance of the move with regard to the independence
            of the Faculty Senate, requested that the following
            resolution be placed on the agenda of the December
            Faculty Senate meeting:

                  WHEREAS,          the University Faculty Senate is
                                    empowered to act in place of the
                                    Faculty, and

                  WHEREAS,          in order to do this, it must
                                    maintain its clear independence
                                    from the University
                                    Administration, both in fact and in
                                    perception, be it therefore

                  RESOLVED,         that the Faculty Senate requests,
                                    and strongly recommends, that
                                    the Faculty Senate Office
                                    continue to be located in a
                                    building that does not also house
                                    the central administration.

      The meeting was adjourned at 4:40 p.m.

                                    Respectfully submitted,

                                    Thomas Angell
                                    University Faculty Senate

Attachment:  Academic Conflicts of Interest