Location: SSC 205, Time: 12:30 p.m.
In Attendance: Meredith Dickens, Penny Edwards, Stacey Frank, Pam Goodman,
Justin Herndon, Tracy Kilgore, Som Linthicum, Laura McClain, Jeremy McCracken,
Robin McFall, Michael Oates, Julia Seligson, James Walker
Not in Attendance:
Guests: Scott
Harvey, Croslena Johnson, Scott Jaeschke,
Galen Dehay, Gwen Owens, Debbie Vance
Presider:
Mia Tensley
Welcome and
Agenda: Mia
called the meeting to order at 12:35 pm and directed all in attendance to the
agenda for the meeting.
New Business:
1.
Introduction
of New Senators - Mia Tensley
·
Mia
presented the names of the new senators and welcomed them to Faculty Senate
·
Mia
explained that one of the senators from Health Education, Ashley Alvarez, has
left the College and she has asked Dr. Lynn Lewis to appoint/elect a new
senator.
·
Elections
for senators to represent adjunct faculty are currently taking place. The newly
elected senators will be introduced at the September 2018 meeting.
·
Mia
distributed notebooks to all senators. These notebooks are to help with
organization of FS materials and to help new senators have access to pertinent
documents such as the Constitution and By-laws.
Action to be taken as a result of discussion, person(s)
responsible, and timeline: None
2.
Updates
from Student Development – Croslena Johnson
Croslena
Johnson handed out information cards about TC Cares, Student Development and
Wellness Services and the Health Fair and introduced new initiatives.
· TC
Cares – developed a card with information to help identify behaviors in our
students so that faculty can potentially recommend a student to TC Cares who
might benefit from their support and services. Each academic division has a
representative.
Faculty
can contact that representative or bring concerns to the larger core group.
· Student
Development and Wellness Services – more resources for students with medical
conditions, transportation problems, housing issues, etc., to help students
stay in school. SDWS can also aid with
information about Academic Suspension and Financial Aid appeals.
· Emergency
funds are available for extenuating circumstances, only one time for up to
$500, to help with fuel, books, supplies, bus tickets, meals (not utilities and
rent). The question was raised if faculty can contribute to this fund, and
Croslena will get back to us with an answer. (Faculty might be able to earmark
our contribution to the Foundation for this fund.)
· There
is a grant available to help graduating students from Pickens and Oconee
counties with professional attire for job interviews and transitioning to the
workplace.
· REACH
Counseling – Croslena has cards that can be distributed to students. New
agreement provides five free sessions per issue for students.
· SC
Thrive – students need to make appointments due to time of each session (45
minutes per application), and there is a two-week turnaround for assistance.
New Initiatives
Food
Pantry – officially approved by Executive Staff August 2018 and opens September
12, 2018. There won’t be an announcement for students, but faculty will be
informed about this service and can refer a student. The pantry is small for now and for immediate
needs. The students can also be connected to other food resources in the
area.
Upcoming Events
· Suicide Prevention
Month begins Sept. 1, and a table will be set up at the Get Connected event
with more information for students.
·
Get
the Edge and SC Thrive event will be September 12 with community partners. SC
Thrive counselors will be available for quick checks.
·
Health
Fair will be October 3 on all campuses (see card). Services will include blood
pressure, vision, flu shots, mini yoga sessions, free lunch, etc. Divisions
will get cards to distribute. Croslena also distributed cards concerning some
of these services. She is willing to print and distribute more cards if
senators wish to share with their divisions. We can email her at cjohnso5@tctc.edu if interested in
additional cards.
Action to be taken as a result of discussion, person(s)
responsible, and timeline: 1.
Senators need to ensure faculty in their respective divisions are aware of
these services and events. 2. Senators
will contact Croslena if they wish to have cards to distribute to
divisions. 3. Croslena will let us know
about possible donations to the Emergency Fund.
3.
Updates from Registrar – Scott Harvey
·
Five
Banner 9 training sessions will occur in September (69 total). Scott explained
each of the five different sessions and who should attend each.
·
Banner
9 Navigation: Everyone required to
attend except adjuncts
·
Student
Profile and Advising: 15 Banner forms in one spot. All student-facing employees should attend.
·
DegreeWorks:
condensed multiple blocks into two (Degree and Major). Course substitutions will be submitted
electronically and must be submitted when the student registers for the course,
not when applying for graduation
·
Student
Ed. Planner: will now be drag and drop. Degree information will go back as far
as 2006. Once courses are entered by faculty, the courses will push to Course
Scheduler. Advisors must note that
beginning Oct. 1, the SIG will no longer be available.
·
Course
Management: submit grades, attendance tracker, etc. Everyone must attend.
Banner access will
be denied to employees/faculty if training is not attended. Sessions will be
recorded and in SPARK for those off-campus, but there will be no make-up
sessions.
Action to be taken as a result of discussion, person(s)
responsible, and timeline: Senators
need to ensure faculty in their respective divisions are aware of training
sessions and penalty for non-attendance.
4.
Election
of Vice President and Secretary – Mia Tensley
Mia explained the problems with the
previous vote held on May 3.
Issue
1: Not everyone who wanted to be included in the voting for the two positions
was included
Issue
2: According to the Constitution, elections for VP and Secretary should be held
during the first meeting rather than the last meeting.
Mia then put the names of all
eligible senators on the screen, and some senators wanted their
names taken off the list for
consideration. Pam Goodman asked for further clarification about
who was running for each position,
and there was further discussion of who was eligible to run
for office.
Penny Edwards and Stacey Frank
expressed concerns about a revote. Mia clarified that since the election
violated our own guidelines in the Constitution and By-laws, we must revote in
order to have a valid election.
Robin McFall then nominated Julia Seligson for VP, and
Julia Seligson nominated Robin McFall for Secretary. (Both nominations received
a second.) After clarifying nothing in Constitution and By-laws prevents the
past-president from serving in another capacity, Penny Edwards nominated Stacey
Frank for secretary. Som Linthicum and Stacey Frank agreed to run for both
positions.
Senators then filled out the
ballots and handed them in to Mia.
*Galen Dehay counted ballots by position. At the end of the meeting, Mia
announced that Julia Seligson had been elected VP and Robin McFall had been
elected Secretary.
Action to be taken as a result of
discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline: None
5.
Robert’s Rules of Order – Scott Jaeschke
Scott Jaeschke gave a brief
overview of the major points of Robert’s Rules and provided a primer with more
information. Robert’s Rules are a “tool
to get business done.” He explained Motions, Debates and Votes, along with
privileged motions and the responsibilities of the chair (see primer). He also explained the importance of an agenda
with time limits to help move business forward and stay on task.
Stacey Frank said she didn’t
understand why all votes/motions that occurred during the last couple of
meetings/several years weren’t impacted by not following Robert’s Rules. Scott
explained that the previous vote was in conflict with the procedures described
in the Constitution as it is worded, so it was invalid, but the other motions
didn’t conflict with the wording of the Constitution.
Action to be taken
as a result of discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline: Senators are to
review the Robert’s Rules “Cheat Sheet” information that was emailed earlier.
This is a five-page document. It is also included in the FS notebook.
BREAK from 1:32-1:37
Old Business:
1. At-Large
Member (Other Health Ed Senator) – Ashley Alvarez, the previous senator, left
the college. Jeremy McCracken became the
At-Large senator because other divisions didn’t put forth a faculty member to
be the At-Large member
For further clarification, Stacey Franks said that
with the division elections in the spring, each division elected or appointed
senators. For example, Health Ed had a senator leave the College. The person
whose name was then put forth said she was not willing to serve on Senate, so
that division is still in the process. The only division with multiple faculty
willing to serve on Senate was Arts and Sciences. So, when the A&S election
was held via Survey Monkey, the top two vote-getters were elected as senators
from Arts and Sciences and the third was placed on Senate as the At-Large
Member. That person is Jeremy McCracken.
Action to be taken as a result of
discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline: None
2. By-Laws and
Constitution Discussion - Mia Tensley
The motion to postpone the vote on the revised
constitution and by-laws made at the April 20, 2018 meeting was revisited.
The motion was to postpone the vote until
Fall 2018 in order to provide ample time for review and faculty input, and Mia
explained she wanted the vote held in November to meet the fall requirement of
the motion. Mia proposed a new ad hoc
committee to work on the Constitution and By-laws revision to decide on the
best course of action for finalizing the revision, providing the revision to
the faculty, receive feedback, and present a final product to the Senate for a
vote. She stated that this proposed ad hoc group would be given 15-20 minutes
on each FS agenda to report the work being completed.
Mia also stated the intent of her proposal
is to thoroughly examine the proposed changes in order to be able to help all
faculty understand them. She felt having new eyes on the document would help
determine any possible points of contention. She also stated her proposed ad
hoc committee would include adjunct and lecturer representation, something she
felt was needed to help resolve issues from last year when those groups felt
excluded
Penny Edwards pointed out that the
discussion during the April 20 meeting also included the use of focus groups
and/or forums to review the changes and receive feedback. Galen Dehay also
mentioned using IR as a tool. She was concerned about “reinventing the wheel”
by having an additional ad hoc group doing the same work that had already been
done revising the documents. Why was a
new group necessary? Why do we need to completely start over?
Laura McClain was also concerned about
moving forward with a new group who doesn’t understand the context of the
changes that were made, especially since none of the previous ad hoc group
members were on the suggested list for the new ad hoc committee.
Galen Dehay, Som Linthicum, and Robin
McFall presented explanations and analogies to explain that the first group’s
work was simply being handed off to the next group for further work. Som[LS1] [MB2] stated he saw the
proposal as a way to put new eyes on the proposed changes. He provided an
analogy that the suggested revisions are similar to product development: one
group developed, and a second group will gather feedback, perhaps through focus
groups and listening sessions. Overall, the writing should stand for itself and
be interpreted the same way by a new group.
Penny made a motion that division
representatives, not the proposed ad hoc group, would go out to faculty to
gather information about the proposed changes to the Constitution and By-Laws.
Stacey seconded. Julia asked for the initial ad hoc committee to make
explanations to the entire FS concerning the proposed changes.
After more discussion, Penny amended her
motion as follows:
i.
All
current senators not on the previous ad-hoc committee will review the proposed
changes to the Constitution and By-Laws and bring any questions concerning the
changes to the full senate. Members of the previous ad-hoc will provide
responses, and the full senate will then agree on a resolution.
ii.
Once
a consensus has been reached by FS, senators will then take the proposed
changes to divisions/departments. Senators from each division will determine
how to gather faculty input.
Som Linthicum asked for a point of clarification:
Is this amended motion two parts? Penny stated yes. Robin stated she had
written it down as two parts.
Laura asked for a point of clarification:
With the motion, would we still need a new ad hoc group? All agreed we would
not at this point.
Jeremy called for the question.
Action to be taken as a result of
discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline: All senators not on the previous ad-hoc committee will read
the proposed changes to the Constitutions and By-laws and bring any
questions/concerns to the next FS meeting.
3.
Public
relations – Mia Tensley
Mia
wants to try to change the perception of Faculty Senate. She stated she had
heard from many faculty members that Faculty Senate did not accomplish anything
they could see. She asked for all senators to bring creative ideas for ways to
change that perception and get the message out that we do accomplish many
things.
Action to be taken as a result of
discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline: All senators will bring
ideas to the table at the next FS meeting.
4.
Use
of Teams in Microsoft Office 365 – Mia Tensley
Minutes will be
added to the appropriate folder in Teams (in Microsoft Office 365) no later
than seven business days from the meeting. All senators should have received an
invitation to join the group.
Action to be taken as a result of discussion, person(s)
responsible, and timeline: 1. If any
new senator had not received an email from Microsoft Teams for membership, the
senator must contact Mia Tensley. 2. All senators will read, indicate any necessary
changes, and approve minutes by September 12.
5.
A
motion was made to dismiss, and the meeting was adjourned at 2:30.
Respectfully submitted,
Julia Seligson
Robin McFall
Just to quickly clarify, the analogy I offered was akin
to product development -- one group developing the prototype, and a second
group garnering feedback on that prototype through focus groups and listening
sessions. While the notion that the
language in the document "should stand for itself" is apt, I think
some other more insightful person brought that specific idea to the table
initially :) [LS1]
While I wrote down the comment, I did not write down
who said it. I will gladly change it , though. [MB2]
Re: our two-part motion, do we have target dates for
accomplishing both phases? In my mind,
I'd imagined that the target date for our first phase would be the September
meeting, with departmental/divisional input in phase 2 acquired for the Oct
meeting. Does that timeline make sense
to others, and should we clarify here? [LS3]
We never set specific dates, other than to bring
feedback to discuss at the next meeting. The previous motion--from the spring
meeting--stated "the fall semester." So, my assumption would be that
we would try to complete everything by our November meeting. That is simply my interpretation, though. [MB4]
