REGULAR MEETING OF THE UNIVERSITY FACULTY SENATE
APRIL 3, 1995
MINUTES
Senators excused were: Thomas Angell, David Bellamy, Hilton Brown,
Karen Curtis, Richard Geider, Neil Houser,
Roger Kobak, Ajay Manrai, Roger Murray, Ali
Poorani, Henry Reynolds, David P. Roselle,
Michael Rosenberg, Wendy Samter, D. Allan
Waterfield
Senators absent were: Martha Carothers, William Idsardi
I. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
The agenda was adopted as presented.
II. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
The minutes of the March 6, 1995 meeting were approved as
written.
III. REMARKS BY UNIVERSITY PROVOST SCHIAVELLI
With great humor and charge Provost Schiavelli thanked the
community for its patience and good wishes during his illness and
paid particular thanks to Margaret Andersen, Costel Denson, Carol
Hoffecker, Jeffrey Quirico, the deans, and the chairs.
Provost Schiavelli's plans to visit all 57 departments and programs
were revised. He reached 21 departments this year and will add the
cancelled visits to the schedule for Fall.
One of the purposes of these visits is to formulate a set of goals for
a pending capital campaign. These goals include specifics for
enhancing strong programs and formation of new initiatives.
Provost Schiavelli will soon review the 1995-1996 base budget with
the Executive Committee, the Committee on Budgetary and Space
Priorities, and the Academic Priorities Review Committee. This
budget is constrained by the uncertainty of the level of State
funding. Nonetheless, units have not been asked for revisions of
any part of their base budgets.
The promotion and tenure process is finished for this year. Provost
Schiavelli is impressed how seriously this task is taken at Delaware
and how much study and work is done.
At the end of these remarks the Provost volunteered to do a Lyndon
Johnson and show his compression stocking. This offer generated
great laughter.
IV. ANNOUNCEMENTS
President McLaughlin made two announcements:
a. The open hearing on Distance Learning will be held at
4:00 p.m. on Thursday, April 20 in 120 Smith.
b. Senator John Cooper of Military Science called attention
to the availability of ROTC scholarship monies.
V. OLD BUSINESS - None
VI. NEW BUSINESS
A. Recommendation from the Committee on Research on the
addition of a "Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statement" to the
Faculty Handbook.
Charles Robinson, Chairperson of the Committee on Research,
said the purpose of this resolution was to produce a simple
and straightforward, two-page statement which may be
attached to grant proposals.
The original resolution was given two amendments:
1. Strike out "and the Board of Trustees" from
the second Resolved. It was established after the
resolution was drafted that the Board of Trustees
do not need to approve this resolution.
2. Add a third Resolution (please see the bold face
portion below).
These amendments were adopted without debate after the
wording of the last resolution was formed.
Following is the revised resolution as approved:
WHEREAS, the National Science Foundation has
instituted a new policy, effective June
28, 1995, requiring that all grantee
institutions employing more than fifty
persons maintain their own conflict of
interest policies and have established
minimum requirements for those
policies, and
WHEREAS, this new policy requires certifications
from principal investigators, co-principal
investigators, and authorized
institutional representatives, and
WHEREAS, the University Faculty Senate
Committee on Research has formulated
a specific policy statement which
meets these standards and has held an
Open Hearing on the proposed
University of Delaware statement, be it
therefore
RESOLVED, that the University Faculty Senate
approve and recommend the adoption
of the attached Conflict of Interest
Disclosure Statement, as forwarded by
the Committee on Research, and be it
further
RESOLVED, that upon approval of the appropriate
officers of administration, the attached
"Conflict of Interest Disclosure
Statement" be included in the Faculty
Handbook at the end of II.15.c in
Section II, page II-11, and be it further
RESOLVED, that this disclosure may be further
amended and/or updated by the
Committee on Research to reflect the
latest changes in NSF and/or PHS
guidelines. The Committee on
Research will report these changes to
the University Faculty Senate.
There was a brief discussion on the wording of the two-page
disclosure. The discussion concluded by deciding to keep the
original wording.
B. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Executive
Committee, with the concurrence of the Committee on Faculty
Welfare and Privileges, for the addition of a "Statement on
Professional Ethics" to the Faculty Handbook.
The attached statement on professional ethics was taken from
the AAUP Policies Document of 1990. This resolution was
passed unanimously.
WHEREAS, the Faculty Handbook contains a
section defining Academic Freedom,
and
WHEREAS, there is no corresponding section on
Professional Ethics clearly stating the
ethical obligations of the faculty, be it
therefore
RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate recommends
the inclusion of the AAUP Statement
on Professional Ethics as it appears in
the 1990 edition of the AAUP Policy
Documents and Report, and be it
further
RESOLVED, that this statement be inserted into the
Faculty Handbook immediately
following B. "Academic Freedom,"
Section III, pages III-4 and III-5.
C. Recommendation from the Committee on Faculty Welfare and
Privileges revising the Application Procedure and Qualifications
for Sabbatical Leave under "Sabbatical Leave" in the Faculty
Handbook.
The first resolution was passed unanimously without
discussion.
RESOLUTION 1
WHEREAS, faculty members need as much
advance notice as possible to prepare
for a sabbatical, be it therefore
RESOLVED, that Section O, under "Leave of
Absence," subsection Application
Procedure, paragraph (c), pages III-39-
40 be amended as follows: [Addition in
bold type]
(c) . . . . The dean, if approving in turn,
will establish priorities and where
required make budgetary
recommendations to the Provost. The
Provost will study all aspects of the
recommendations and make the
determination concerning the leave.
The applicant shall be notified of the
action at each of the three levels of
administrative review at the time of
that action.
RESOLUTION 2
The second resolution produced some discussion. Dean
Richards observed that the existing policy for a cost-free
sabbatical leave program is fairly standard in higher education
and asked how the resolution originated. President
McLaughlin replied that the Executive Committee found an
inconsistency in that some departments apparently received
additional support for sabbatical leaves and others did not.
This issue was sent to the Committee on Faculty Welfare and
Privileges. James Krum, Chairperson of the Committee on
Faculty Welfare and Privileges, said large departments can
cover sabbaticals by rotation of staff assignments while
smaller departments often require temporary staff. Provost
Schiavelli said the second proposal made sense particularly in
view of the budgetary references in the first. Dean Richards
asked if the proposal would constrain chairs if a large fraction
of a department requested leaves at the same time. Provost
Schiavelli responded that the new proposal opened an
opportunity for funding when a department had an
exceptionally heavy demand for sabbaticals. Provost
Andersen said the current leave policy permits chairs some
latitude in postponing leaves in such circumstances. This
concluded the discussion. The following resolution was
passed unanimously:
WHEREAS, a sabbatical system, by definition,
results in costs to the University, and
WHEREAS, not all departments are staffed at a
level to permit leaves without
incremental costs to the University, be
it therefore
RESOLVED, that Section O, under "Leave of
Absence," subsection Qualifications for
Sabbatical Leave, paragraph (f), page
III-39, which states "The granting of
the leave must not result in additional
costs to the University," be deleted.
D. Recommendation from the Committee on Student and Faculty
Honors on the eligibility of faculty for the CASE Award.
Dean Murray asked if the resolution expanded the pool of
nominees for the CASE Award to everyone since self-
nomination is possible. President McLaughlin answered that
this possibility exists. The resolution then was passed
unanimously.
WHEREAS, the "Professor of the Year" national
award sponsored by the Council for the
Advancement and Support of Education
(CASE) is nominated on evidence of the
professor's teaching abilities, and
WHEREAS, the Faculty Senate rule in effect (April
16, 1984) restricts award nominees to
the most recent winner of the Francis
Alison Award, and
WHEREAS, classroom teaching is not the primary
criterion for the Francis Alison Award,
and
WHEREAS, the Alumni Distinguished Professor
Award is solely based on classroom
teaching abilities, be it therefore
RESOLVED, that the nominee for the "Professor of
the Year" award sponsored by the
Council for the Advancement and
Support of Education be selected from
among the winners of the Francis
Alison Award or any nominees or
winners of the Alumni Distinguished
Professor Award.
E. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Executive
Committee regarding the Ad Hoc Committee on Smoking
Policy. The resolution discharging the committee with
appreciation was passed without discussion.
WHEREAS, the Ad Hoc Committee on Smoking
Policy has filed its final report with the
Executive Committee, and
WHEREAS, the Executive Committee has received
and discussed that report, and
WHEREAS, an open hearing on the contents of the
report was held on October 20, 1994,
be it therefore
RESOLVED, that the Ad Hoc Committee on
Smoking Policy is hereby discharged
with the thanks of the Faculty Senate.
F. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Executive
Committee, with the concurrence of the Committee on Faculty
Welfare and Privileges on amending the Smoking Policy as
approved by the Faculty Senate on April 8, 1991. After a
brief discussion originating from Senator Wolters asking if the
scent-free policy applies to after shave lotion and perfume (it
does not), the following resolution was passed:
RESOLVED, that the Smoking Policy in the Faculty
Handbook at V, "Personnel Benefits
and Miscellaneous Information,"
subsection L., "Smoking Policy," pages
V-7 and V-8, be amended as follows:
1. Current descriptions of prohibited and
allowable smoking areas be deleted.
2. The following statement be added in its
place:
Except for student housing and other
residential areas, the University of Delaware
declares the interior of all University-owned
or occupied buildings, University-owned
vehicles, and at least one entrance to each
building to be smoke-free. Smoking will be
permitted outside one designated entrance
for those buildings with more than one
entrance. The smoking/non-smoking
designation for each entrance shall be
determined by the Unit Head of that building,
in conjunction with the Assistant Director of
University Plant Operations, Grounds
Division. Compliance with this policy is the
responsibility of all members of the University
community.
G. Recommendation from the Committee on Student Life for
revisions to the Code of Conduct.
In discussion, Dean Brooks said that the proposal was drafted
to reduce the vagueness of the prior policy. The prior policy
has been questioned by attorneys and parents. The proposal
adopts some of the Delaware Code defining weapons. For
example, a baseball bat used in the commission of a crime
becomes a weapon. The policy permits the use of inoperable
rifles in drill teams or for martial arts classes under the
statement, "This policy is not to be construed as a prohibition
against instruments and chemicals expressly authorized for the
pursuit of the academic mission of the University."
The following resolution was passed:
WHEREAS, a review is conducted of the Code of
Conduct periodically and,
WHEREAS, some changes are necessary because
of student behavior problems, be it
therefore
RESOLVED, that the following changes be made in
The Official Student Handbook, under
the Code of Conduct, page 29.
Proposal for Changes to Code of Conduct Violation #18
Weapons, Firearms or Explosive Devices on Campus
[Revised policy is in bold]
Current Policy
Weapons, Firearms or Explosive Devices on Campus
Unauthorized possession or use of firearms, fireworks or
chemicals which are explosive in nature, and any other
types of arms defined as "dangerous instruments" or
"deadly weapons" by the Delaware Code Title 11 Crimes
and Criminal Procedures in Section 222, and Chapter 22
of the Code of the City of Newark. (Copies of these
Codes are available in the University Police Department
Office.)
Revised Policy
Dangerous Instruments, Deadly Weapons, and Explosive
Chemicals or Devices on Campus
The University's policy concerning dangerous
instruments, weapons, firearms and explosives on
campus is in conformity with the Delaware Criminal
Code, Chapter 11, Section 222 and relevant sections of
the Newark Municipal Code. Copies of these Codes are
available upon request from the Office of Public Safety.
The attempted or actual use, or threat of use of the
instruments or explosives contained in this policy is of
primary concern for the safety of the campus
community. However, the University also prohibits the
possession of several instruments which may not be
defined as dangerous instruments, weapons or firearms
under the law. These prohibited instruments include but
are not limited to BB guns, pellet guns, air rifles, paint
guns, decorative or functional swords, and martial arts
weapons.
This policy is not to be construed as a prohibition against
instruments and chemicals expressly authorized for the
pursuit of the academic mission of the University.
Questions concerning authorization of chemicals and
prohibited instruments should be addressed specifically
to the Office of Public Safety or the Dean of Students
Office.
The following are prohibited under Delaware Law and
University Policy:
1. Dangerous Instrument
Any instrument may be defined as a dangerous
instrument if it is used, attempted or threatened to
be used, or is readily capable of causing death or
serious physical injury.
2. Deadly Weapon
The Criminal Codes cite the following as deadly
weapons: firearms (including any weapon from
which a shot, projectile or other object may be
discharged by force, whether operable or
inoperable, loaded or unloaded), a bomb, a knife
(other than an ordinary pocketknife carried in a
closed position, with a blade of three inches or
less), a switchblade knife, a billy, blackjack,
bludgeon, metal knuckles, slingshot, razor, bicycle
chain, ice pick, or any dangerous instrument which
is used or attempted to be used to cause death or
serious physical injury.
3. Explosive Devices and Chemicals
A substance, or combination of substances
possessed and/or prepared for the purpose of
producing a visible or audible effect by
combustion, explosion, deflagration or detonation
is prohibited. Fireworks are included among
prohibited explosive devices, as are illegal and
potentially dangerous chemicals.
Proposal for Changes to Code of Conduct Violation #8
False Information
Current Policy
False Information
A. Knowingly making a false oral or written statement
in a University disciplinary hearing or to a
University official.
B. Reporting the false presence of an explosive or
incendiary device or fire.
C. Falsely reporting a crime.
D. Possessing any form of false identification.
Revised Policy
False Information
A. Intentionally making a false oral or written
statement in a University disciplinary hearing, or to
a University official.
B. Intentionally making a false oral or written
statement in order to misrepresent the character,
qualifications or reputation of another.
C. Falsely reporting the presence of an explosive or
incendiary
device or fire.
D. Falsely reporting a crime.
E. Possessing any form of false identification.
H. Introduction of New Business
None was introduced.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:55 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jon Olson
Secretary
University Faculty Senate
JO/rg
Attachment