GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
MEETING OF THE
GENERAL FACULTY ASSEMBLY
Combined with a meeting of the
Tuesday, February 6, 2001, Student
- President Clough opened the
meeting at 3:05 PM and stated that this was a combined meeting of the
General Faculty Assembly and of the Academic Senate.
- The President commented on
- The policy on
"Extension of the Probationary Period for Tenure" passed by the
Senate last year has not yet been agreed on by the Board of Regents and
may not be decided before the summer.
- The supplemental
budget includes various items of interest to Tech. There is good support
for the Georgia Research Alliance, the Yamacraw project and the Cancer
Initiative. Design funding for the Advanced Computing Building has been
approved as well as initial funding for a GTREP building in Savannah.
There is also funding to cover the deficit in the Health Plan.
- The 2002 budget is
likely to be weak. It does not recognize the need to improve graduate student
health care and prospect for new workload funding is poor. Average salary
raises are proposed at 4.5 percent. System-wide enrollment is down and
this impacts funding to Tech.
- It is proposed to hold
down the Fall 2002 freshman enrollment to slightly less than last year.
We are anticipating a higher than normal retention into the second year;
similar to that observed in Fall 2000.
- Faculty recognition is
strong. In early announcements of the NSF Career Awards, Tech has
received five in Engineering and 2 or 3 in the Sciences.
- The Undergraduate
Research Initiative is operational and managed by McMath and Liotta.
- The Capital Campaign
is completed and has raised $712M. Contributions have been received from
about 50,000 separate individuals and entities. The Campaign has created
54 endowed Chairs and 233 Scholarships. Solicitations of support are
- The SAC-II facility
has been designed. Funds to design the "Technology Square"
facility on the south side of Fifth Street have been allocated; the
designer and contractors have been chosen. Land on the north side of
Fifth Street has been leased for the Yamacraw Design Center.
3. At the invitation of the President, the
Registrar commented that this term all grades will be submitted through a
4. It was moved, seconded and passed that the
following minutes be approved. September 18th 2000 meeting of the
GFA and AS (combined), October 10th 2000 meeting of the General
Faculty Assembly; December 5th 2000 meeting of the Academic Senate.
5. President Clough called on Joe DiGregorio to
discuss Continuing Education at Tech. DiGregorio stated that, nation-wide,
Continuing Education was now a $60 billion a year business with a substantial
part being handled by for-profit entities. Tech’s recent activities are
described in a handout distributed at the meeting (attached to the minutes). We
are showing an annual growth of close to 20 percent in revenues, CEUs and
courses. Within the University System, U of GA has the largest number of CEUs
(119,000 ), but Tech is second with 50,500. The State supports only 5 percent
of the Tech program revenue but supports 51 percent of the U. of GA. revenue.
Of the Continuing Education revenue, some 44 percent is returned to the units
which create the courses, 37 percent goes to direct expenses and the remainder
is used to support the operations of the Department. As a challenge for the
future, we need to maintain high-quality programming while also creating more
courses in high demand areas such as computer-related services, software, and
high-tech manufacturing. Clough commented that the problem with State funding
has a historical basis and we are working, with some success to change things.
Ed Reedy commented on the users perspective. As
an example of a successful course he cited an offering in "Radar
Technology" to which he has contributed and which has been run for 31
years, serving four to five thousand students. It has had a huge impact on the
"Radar" community and has led to considerable research sponsorship.
He commented that students are sometimes dissatisfied with the physical
facilities of the courses, such as classroom space and accessibility; the new
"Global Learning Center" will greatly help to alleviate these
problems. He cited two challenges which concern faculty.
- Overhead cost when the
programs must contribute to the debt service for the new facilities.
- The ownership of
intellectual property. Is this to be treated like a patent or like a
The President commented that the new Center will
cost about $30 M and result in a debt service of about $2.3 M per annum. This
may be covered by increased state appropriations or may be reduced as the
result of donor gifts. We are seeking to improve incentives for faculty to
contribute to these programs.
In response to questions about the capacity of
the program, DiGregorio stated that by 2010 it was hoped to handle 30,000
students per year in the new facility. The hotel will have 250 beds. There is a
considerable interest from industry in using the facility but we do not want
industry to dominate. In response to a question about costs, DiGregorio stated
that Tech’s costs are about 10 to 20 percent lower than the average of other
schools. He stated also that Tech will need to market programs beyond the
state. It was commented that there was a need to improve support services in
connection with technical facilities, such as computers; DiGregorio agreed that
this was needed. In response to a question as to whether we will decrease our
on-site programs it was stated that we wish to increase such activities since
they provide high margins.
In conclusion Clough thanked both DiGregorio and
6. The President commented that the search for a
new Provost was proceeding well. Four to five candidates will be brought to
Tech for detailed interview in late February. The schedules for these visits
will be published. He then announced that the further business of the meeting
was related to activities of the Academic Senate.
- The President called on Leon
McGinnis to discuss the proposed changes to the Faculty Handbook related
to Procedures of the Promotion and Tenure process. McGinnis noted that
these proposals had been introduced at the December meeting of the
Academic Senate and made available for review. He reviewed the more
significant aspects of the proposals, particularly those related to
notification of schedules, the specification of outcomes and feed-back to
candidates. He moved that these be approved, and this was agreed without
dissent. (Text of the approved changes is attached to the minutes).
- The President called on
Richard LeBlanc to discuss the document which discusses "Best
Practices" in the P&T process. The principal intent is to make
the process more transparent to faculty and to improve feedback. The
President commented that the document would be reviewed to see whether
some of the ideas might be implemented across the board. There is a need
to see the contributions made to Education and Undergraduate Research
discussed in a level fashion for all units.
- The President called on
Deborah Johnson, Chair of the Student Regulations Committee to present the
revision of items I through XVII of the Student Rules and Regulations. She
pointed out that these had been published and that the majority of the
important changes had been agreed to by previous actions of the Senate.
She added a further document which slightly alters the wording of item XXG
related to Appeal Procedures. She moved that the published changes and the
revision of item XXG be approved. There was some discussion about a phrase
implying Board of Regents Approval of the "Student Bill of
Rights" and a request that this statement be removed. The Secretary
stated that the validity and origin of that phrase would be studied and if
not appropriate the Executive Board would, at its next meeting, consider
removing it. Hughes pointed out that there is an inconsistency in the
rules which state that a GPA of 2.00 is required for a student to be in
good standing but that a GPA of only 1.95 was required to award a diploma;
he asked whether that item had been dealt with. Johnson stated that they
had missed that problem and would consider it. The motion was called for a
vote and passed. (Text of the approved changes is attached to the minutes)
- The President called on Joe
Hughes, Chair of the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee, to introduce
minutes of that committee for approval. Hughes first introduced important
action items. He first moved that special course numbers be introduced to
facilitate Core Curriculum transferability (minutes of September 13th
). This was approved. He then moved acceptance of the proposed method of
dealing with Tech’s violation of the Humanities and Social Sciences
requirements of the Core Curriculum (minutes of January 17th).
He commented that Tech preferred to spread these requirements through the
four-year degree program while other units of the system concentrated the
requirement into low level courses in the early years. In response to a
question, he stated that Tech’s approach to these requirements might, in
principle, hurt students who were transferring to other units of the
system but that this problem already exists and is not changed by the
present proposal. He was asked whether Tech should not just follow the
Board of Regents Curriculum. Hughes replied that this would require the
rewriting of almost all degree programs and preclude the offering of major
courses in the early years; it was not considered desirable. The matter
was called for a vote and passed. Hughes moved that accelerated summer
sessions be permitted for 2001 on the same basis as the previous year;
this was passed. He further moved that all other aspects of the minutes of
September 13, September 27, October 11 and January 17, be approved; this
passed without dissent.
- The president called on Nolan
Hertel, Chair of the Graduate Curriculum Committee, to introduce minutes
of that committee for approval. Hertel stated that the action items were
from the January 25th minutes and included approval of a 5-year
BS/MS program in ME, change to Masters course names in Management and
Architecture, Graduate Certificates for IPST students and changes to the
MS Health Physics program. He moved that these items be approved and this
was agreed. He further moved that the other items of minutes from December
7, December 13 and January 25, 2001 be approved; this was agreed.
- The President called on Steve
Usselman, Chair of the Student Academic and Financial Affairs Committee.
Usselman stated that the committee had now met for the first time in two
years and was considering how to address its charges. The minutes of
December 1st were approved without dissent.
- President Clough called on
Matthew Realff, Chair of the Student Computer Ownership Committee, to
introduce the minutes of that committee. Realff moved that the January 25th
minutes be approved. He commented that these include hardware requirements
which remain unchanged from the previous year except to allow laptops with
the required capabilities. Further, that the only change to software was
the dropping of the Kaleidagraph system which in practice was not being
much used. He was asked whether we can foresee a point at which the
committee will have outlived its usefulness. He replied that the decisions
of the committee remained important since there was a requirement that OIT
support the software package. The minutes were approved without dissent.
- The President called for any
other business and there being none he accepted a motion to adjourn at
Edward W. Thomas
Secretary of the Faculty.
February 7, 2001
Attachments to the Archival copy of the minutes:
(1) Viewgraphs provided by DiGregorio related to the Continuing Education
(2) Approved changes to section 3.3 of the Faculty Handbook, related to
promotion and tenure.
(Also to be found at http://www.facultysenate.gatech.edu/zrtpfachand.html)
(3) Approved changes to items I through XVII of the Student rules and
(Also to be found at http://www.facultysenate.gatech.edu/FacSenR&R.html)
(4) Approved change to item XXG of the Student Rules and Regulations.