Faculty Council Meeting of Tuesday, 8 January 2002
President: Joe Liles; Vice-president: John Woodmansee; Secretary: Floyd Bullard
Minutes
Announcements
There was no food provided at this Faculty Council meeting,
which drew boos and hisses from some hungry faculty members.
Joe apologized on behalf of the Faculty Council officers for not being on
the ball and organizing a second-semester schedule of food-bringers.
A sign-up list was circulated for future FC meetings.
Three recommendations from the “Big Picture” document
were being incorporated directly into the School Improvement Plan (SIP).
These were Item 1 (administration bringing issues to FC for feedback
before making important academic decisions; Item 6 (encouraging and funding
subject-specific professional development for faculty members; and Item 12
(establishing an academic climate throughout the campus).
The largest number of faculty present at this meeting was
30, one shy of a quorum.
Agenda Item 1: Testing Policy
Several students from the Student Government Association (SGA)
presented a proposal that would modify the current policy limiting tests to two
per day that students are required to take. Their proposal (appended to the end of these minutes) would
further limit tests and major assignments to four per week, or three during the
last week of a quarter, and would require that teachers sign up on the on-line
test and assignment sign-up sheet at least a week in advance of major tests and
assignments.
The students gave several arguments for their proposal
(also outlined in the document below), and discussion ensued.
Students said that 5+ tests in one week is not uncommon, and that the
tests tend to bunch up and come at one time.
Faculty members volunteered that this was a necessary consequence of
having 2-3 tests per quarter, and that they cover at least 2-3 weeks’ worth of
material. The students understood
the dilemma.
Q: Why only three tests during the last week of a quarter
instead of four? A: Because
that’s when many presentations and group projects are due.
Q: Tests do tend to fall at the same time.
What can get in the way is homework.
Perhaps we should lighten up the homework load during busy weeks.
The students left, and discussion continued a short time in
their absence. No resolutions were
made, but it was agreed upon that all tests and major assignments should be
posted on-line using “OIC” or posting directly using the on-line form.
This is found by going to the upper right-hand corner of the At-A-Glance
page, and following the link to “tutorials and tests”, then following the
tiny link that says “click here to view NCSSM test schedule”.
At the bottom of the linked page is a link teachers may follow to
complete an on-line form.
It was also generally agreed upon that since many faculty
were not present for this meeting of the Faculty Council, that they should be
encouraged to post tests and major assignments as well.
A common practice by teachers is to say “I don’t post my tests
on-line, but I’m flexible and will reschedule for a student if need be”.
The students do not like this, and it also makes it hard for other
teachers to see (and perceive correctly) what times are busiest for students.
Agenda Item 2: NCSSM
Governance
John Woodmansee led a short discussion on issues that the
Governance Task Force was facing that would have a large impact on NCSSM
faculty. Options that were proposed
in an earlier FC meeting were being governed by DPI, and being governed directly
by the Governor’s office. The
Governance Task Force rejected both of these.
DPI would require the use of certain textbooks, certification of all
teachers, end-of-year tests, etc.: things that kept us away from DPI when
the school was founded. And being
under the Governor would make us very vulnerable if the Governor didn’t like
NCSSM, or if (s)he wanted to use us as a political bargaining chip.
The options that remain are becoming a constituent of the
UNC system and remaining an affiliate school as we are now.
Via an overhead transparency, John shared some of what our structure
would look like (e.g., our Board of Trustees) if we were a constituent of
UNC. Because we would remain a high
school, some necessary differences between us and universities would exist (e.g.,
tenure, budget reductions linked with public schools rather than university) and
it would not be unreasonable for us to expect certain waivers (e.g., we
would insist upon our salary scale being at least what it currently is).
Still under discussion: curriculum and tenure.
But curriculum isn’t a big issue, since it wouldn’t change.
Each institution in the UNC system determines its own curriculum.
But tenure is a big issue. It
is not a requirement of UNC constituent institutions. All of the UNC schools do have tenure except for the School
of the Arts. Their system was
modeled on ours: contracts without tenure.
What do we want?
Unfortunately, at 4:55, there was not enough time to have a thorough discussion of this issue. The meeting adjourned.
Appended Item:
Student
Government Association-Testing Policy Committee
(Steven
Gentile, Alex Baranpuria, Brandon Carroll, Andrew Chen, Katherine Chen)
Page
27 in the Student Handbook states the following:
Teachers register all tests
and quizzes of 15 minutes or more in length for each instructional day with the
Academic Programs Office. Students
scheduled for more than two major tests / quizzes on any given day may check the
register to determine the order in which the tests were entered.
The first two teachers to register have priority.
This means a student is obligated to take these as scheduled. Teachers scheduling tests after the two with priority are
required to work with the student in rescheduling the tests at the earliest
possible date, if the student requests it.
It is the responsibility of the student to take the initiative prior to
the day of the tests in question to inform teachers and resolve problems because
of the scheduling of multiple tests on the same day.
Problems
associated with the Current Guidelines:
·
A student may have up to ten tests per week
·
In addition to tests, students may have other major
assignments
o
Major Papers
§
Document Based Questions (DBQ)
§
Research Papers
§
Literature Reviews
o
Group Presentations
§
Symposiums
§
Research Presentations
o
Major Labs
§
State Fair Lab
§
Fly Lab
§
Investigations
·
A student will not have adequate time to prepare for tests,
thereby not demonstrating optimal subject comprehension
·
Tests account for 35-60% of final quarter grade
o
Tests of this magnitude require ample preparation
o
A student may be overwhelmed by multiple assignments that
all require a certain amount of preparation
·
Consequences
o
Last minute cramming (cramming is not effective for
retention of knowledge)
o
Sleep deprivation
o
Decreased academic performance
Goals:
·
To revise and enhance the current Testing Schedules and
Times for Administration as stated in the Student Handbook
·
To provide each student with the opportunity to exhibit
mastery of the subject material
·
Allow students to utilize time management skills
·
Reduce stress and increase sleep to heighten attentiveness
and participation in class
Possible Resolutions:
·
Implementing a procedure that incorporates tests and major
assignments
·
Limit tests to four (4) per week, three (3) during the last
week of the quarter
·
Mandatory notification of upcoming tests and/or major
assignments to OIC, one week prior to administration
·
If the student is overwhelmed by the course load, as defined
by the Test Procedure Policy, they must take the initiative to make alternate
arrangements with individual instructors