For your information and corrections if needed, I submit unofficial minutes
of today's meeting. Please email me with any suggested changes.


The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
Faculty Minutes
March 17, 2004

Faculty Senate President Marvin Ernst called to order the Second Called
Faculty Meeting of 2003-2004 at 3:20 P.M.

First item was approval of the minutes of February 26, 2004.  Prof. Fanning
moved approval; Prof Collins seconded. Approved.

Second item was to eliminate faculty approval of the graduation list. Prof.
Ernst suggested declassifying it as a major issue [thereby not requiring a
second reading]. Prof. Sachsman moved approval; Prof. McCullough seconded.
Approved. Decision followed.

Prof. Russell: My committee thought about this and the origins at UC when
everyone knew all students. We think it is superfluous in a large modern
university. Only occasionally in my 34 years has there been a faculty
question at the meeting. The Records Office is careful about fulfillment.

Prof. Hutchinson: I disagree. The real problem is that the faculty do not
care enough to follow through and come to faculty meetings. Lazy colleagues
are the problem.

Prof. Ernst: I agree, faculty do need to participate, but many are in classes.

Prof. Sturzer: The board could approve or disapprove our candidates.

Prof. Sachsman: A friendly amendment: send the list electronically to
faculty. Faculty can then contact Records Office. Seconded by Prof. Hiestand.

Sandy Zitkus: Many times faculty call me to say that an individual will not
pass; it is very helpful as we prepare for graduation.

Prof. Barrow: Sometimes we can catch mistakes and cheating.

Prof. Nelson: I am in favor or retaining tradition. Why not do away with
graduation?

Prof. Ernst called a vote. The amendment to electronically distribute the
list passed.

Prof. Rushing: Will we say at graduations that students have been
reviewedrather than approved.

Prof. Arfkin: To clarify, do we assume the approval is tacit?

Prof. Ernst called for a vote to eliminate the approval at faculty
meetings, as amended per Prof. Sachsman, and it passed.

Second item was the second reading of the proposal to eliminate as
university requirements oral communication, writing, and computer literacy.

Prof. Sturzer made a motion to separate, and it was seconded. The motion
failed.

Prof. Kuhn: The reason for dropping the courses is rational, but wrong. I
have not heard a good reason for dropping the requirements. Not every
department can handle these skills.

Prof. McCullough: If they are no longer university requirements we lose one
level of administration.

Prof. Darken: My argument is that they are important. Nobody has argued
otherwise. Some say students will get these skills other ways. There is no
data support for this, on the contrary. Others say that they are done other
ways. I find this a bad argument. Departments will not meet these important
needs unless they are monitored. It was mentioned accreditation agencies
are watching. But this is not true; I was in charge of General Education
and back in 1990 these were not being taught.

Some say other requirements are more important in the majors. Could someone
explain why a legacy is being protected in the departments? Why do
departments not use the courses if they think the skills are important. I
would like to hear why we want to eliminate these requirements? Besides the
argument of 120 hours.

Prof. Sachsman called question; Prof. McCullough seconded; motion failed.

However, there was not further discussion and Prof. Ernst called the question.

The vote was 64 in favor of eliminating the university requirements; 59
opposed.

Next item was the proposal to eliminate the P.E. requirement.

Prof. Fanning: We have met the mandate of 120 hours.

Prof. Trimpey: Some programs will not drop these classes, so it is too soon
to say we have met the 120 hour requirement.

Prof. Fanning: It was asked last time if there is supporting evidence if
those who took courses did better than those who did not. We did a
published UTC study that showed it did make a difference. Our students were
less likely to be obese, and a Canadian study and others found the same
results. It has been cut from middle school, high school, and now UTC. The
result is $1.7 trillion cost in health care; 70% would go away if we were
physically active. Congressman Wamp has asked us not to drop the
requirement. Thank you. [applause]

The motion to eliminate the P.E. requirement passed, 66 to 42.

There was no other business, but Prof. Ernst announced that at the faculty
meeting tomorrow the proposed new peer groups will be discussed by Provost
Friedl and Richard Greutzemacher.

Prof. Ernst adjourned the meeting at 3:55 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,
Richard Rice, Faculty Secretary
________________________________________________________________________
Note the final regular Faculty Meeting of 2003-2004 will be April 20th at
10:15 A.M. Refreshments will be served at 9:45 A.M. Please make a note on
your calendar now.