Faculty Council Meeting
Minutes for Meeting on August 18, 2006
11:10 PM, ETC Lecture Hall
President: Dan Teague Vice President: John Woodmansee Secretary: Tamar Castelloe
As this was the first Faculty Council (FC) meeting of the year, President Dan Teague called the meeting to order by offering some introductory comments regarding how he would like to run Faculty Council meetings this year. He would like to conduct more focused meetings that center on one or two major topics so that deeper discussions can be had and that more sides of arguments can be presented. More minor issues will be dealt with outside of the meeting structure. He added that meetings will be more frequent than in past years.
This meeting’s topic was that of the new legislation regarding the Pledge of Allegiance. Section 5 of the Senate bill is attached here: Senate Bill 700, Section 5
Dan asked that the faculty make a recommendation on how to implement the bill to pass on to Jerry Boarman, who will take it to the Board of Trustees (BOT) during their meeting on September 8th.
The discussion included a variety of ideas on how to implement the bill that follow the specified guidelines. There were suggestions to have the Pledge be recited at scheduled times during certain classes that would maximize the number of students who would participate. There were also proposals that the Pledge be recited outside of the classroom setting. Arguments were made that it does not seem quite clear on how the recitation would fit into the classroom structure. One faculty member felt that the classroom setting is too small; if a student chooses not to participate, their decision is much more evident than if the recitation takes place outside of the classroom in a central place on campus, and students who choose to participate would attend the recitation. Others also felt that if the recitation is done in the classroom, faculty members are compelled to no longer remain politically “neutral” to their students. A suggestion was made that perhaps student leadership groups could lead the recitation and that it be done in the hallways so as not to disrupt classes. A faculty member argued that not performing the recitation in the classroom is a form of “avoidance” and that we need to start teaching our students to learn to respect diversity and differences.
Another faculty member suggested that the Pledge be recited more than once each day so that there are more opportunities for students to participate, and if a student chooses not to participate, it would not be quite as evident. It was then suggested that the Pledge be recited once at the beginning of the day (raising of the flag) at the flagpole and once at the end (lowering of the flag). A faculty member did state, however, that they believe more than twice a day would dilute the population at each recitation. Having just two recitations, he said, would still promote a sense of community.
One faculty member asked whether student feedback, perhaps through the SGA, could be gathered before we make our recommendation to the BOT. As the BOT meeting is scheduled two weeks from the date of this meeting, it seemed to some that this would be possible.
A faculty member expressed their concerns about the wording of the legislation and would like clarification on what the bill actually states before making a specific recommendation. Dan stated that Natasha is checking on the language of the bill and what it means we are actually mandated to do.
The following motion was then made with regard to item number ii) in Section 5 of Senate Bill 700:
The Faculty Council recommendation is that we meet the requirements of Senate Bill 700 but that we find a way to recite the Pledge of Allegiance outside of the classroom.
Yea: 52
Nay: 1
Abstain: 4
The motion, therefore, passed.
The meeting adjourned at 12:00 P.M.