The meeting was called to order by John Kolena at 3:45 PM. There were 14 faculty present at this time.

Dot Doyle announced that Action Plan Committee has their report on the web site at the address iluvatar.ncssm.edu/apc. She also announced that there is a bulletin board in Watts stairwell listing student activities so that faculty can know what is going on with the students.

John Kolena announced that the search for new director is progressing and that the goal is still to have a new director in place on July 10. This could be an interim director, but that the interim director would only serve until the next director is hired and arrives on campus.

Faculty Welfare Committee Reports:

A. NCSSM Credit for non-NCSSM courses:

A summary of the Faculty Welfare Committee's recommendations on this and the Faculty Emeritus positions was emailed everyone earlier in the day. A copy of that report is attached.

Misty Anderson summarized their thoughts on NCSSM credit for non-NCSSM courses, asking for reactions and input from the faculty. While these courses might be taught by someone off campus, we might, under certain circumstances, award NCSSM credit. Per the recommendations, the appropriate department would review courses before credit could be awarded. Interdisciplinary courses might be reviewed by the Humanities Department.

Web courses that a student could take at any time might be easy for a student to schedule, but other courses which meet at set times would be very difficult for our students to schedule. This would include most distance learning courses. Currently we are not set up to receive and offer distance learning courses to our students. However, this may be possible in the future with the addition of a new distance leaning studio. It currently costs $23 per hour for us to receive a course.

It was remarked that the report of the Faculty Welfare Committee seemed to have a negative tone, but that allowing students to take non-NCSSM courses for credit might have a positive impact on the school. Others noted that it would certainly add to the workload for any faculty who sponsored a student in such a course. Even though the offering institution would teach and grade the student, the NCSSM sponsor would have to monitor the students work, be responsible for supplemental reports and monitoring students progress. This would be critical if the course was being used to meet a requirement.

It was noted that this might be a way for us to meet the needs of a small number of students and that these students should have demonstrated that they are responsible students. We should make a strong statement in our course catalog about eligibility for such courses.

Students, whether they come to NCSSM or not, are going to have more and more opportunities to take course, for credit, for various reasons. Regardless of the politics or implications, we need to find a way to make the best use of such courses.

Joe Liles, acting as a member of the Faculty Welfare Committee, suggested that we summarize their recommendation and the ideas heard in this discussion and send a summary to Academic Programs office. The motion was made, seconded and passed 32 to 0 with 4 abstentions.

Donita Robinson reported that she taught precalculus this year to students from three high schools. She taught our precalculus course and told UNC-W what the course would be. They asked for a list of topics and a timeline. They wanted the students to take the SAT (part of their admissions process), but we told them that we would give our own placement test. They agreed to this. Donita has 16, 3, and 2 students from the three schools and only 2 dropped the course. Donita stated that the students were a pretty good group. UNC-W never observed her class. All nineteen students report that they plan to go to college and sixteen plan to go instate, but none to UNCW. The credit, if the student applies for it, will, however, transfer to any state institution. Some faculty were skeptical and interested to see how UNC-Chapel Hill or NC State would count this credit.

Currently our on-campus students cannot take one of our courses and receive dual credit. The fact that they could stay at home and take our courses or someone else's courses for both high school and college credit is seen as a threat to our recruitment. Many institutions are using dual credit as a recruitment tool and to pad their numbers. While some of us are morally or philosophically opposed to students getting dual credit, it is something that is not likely to go away, and again we need to find a way to make the best of it. It was noted that the real advantage to students attending NCSSM might not be the actual courses, but the interaction with other similar students in those courses. The students we want to recruit will not get this in a regular high school, junior college, or distance learning/web course. Our contribution should be to give solid courses and to help students who attend NCSSM to develop as worthwhile individuals. We have more than the academic responsibility to our students.

The Faculty Welfare Committee thought that this might be a good idea. Some faculty felt that their thoughts (recommendations) on the subject unnecessarily complicated the issue, that all that was needed was an honorary title and some affiliation with the institution (perhaps office space and/or a computer account) if the retired faculty member desired them. The Committee felt that their proposal was an honest effort to define this position. Such a position could be a way to have faculty continue to provide services and expertise that they currently provide, at no cost to the school. There are limited resources (offices, computers) here, and it is important that current, full-time staff have the space and equipment they need. This would be a to reward or honor retiring faculty. Joe Liles, again seeking some sense of the Faculty, made a motion that retiring faculty be awarded the title of Faculty Emeritus and individuals who wanted to retain some affiliation with the school could apply for space and facilities. The motion was seconded and received 17 votes in favor and 1 opposed. A second motion was made stating that the position or title not be automatic, that faculty would apply and some body would review the applications. The motion was seconded and 4 voted in favor, 7 against, with many abstentions.

John Kolena stated that he would like a vote on the topics outlined in the summary report that he send to us via email. A copy is attached here. Because of the hour, this vote will be conducted via campus mail. Look for forms to vote in your campus mailbox.

Outgoing President Kolena announced that Dan Teague, Mary Roberts, and Leslie Brinson have agreed to serve as the Nominations Committee to conduct elections for the new Faculty Council Officers, the Faculty Evaluation Committee and the Curriculum Council.

The meeting adjourned at 5:07 PM.

Respectfully submitted

John A. Goebel, Secretary