University of Idaho
FACULTY COUNCIL AGENDA
Tuesday, December 6, 2005
Brink Hall Faculty Lounge
Order of Business
I. Call to Order.
Minutes of the 2005-06 Faculty Council Meeting #12, November 15, 2005
III. Chair’s Report.
IV. Provost’s Report.
V. Other Announcements and Communications.
VI. Committee Reports.
Committee on Committees:
Committee Report (Bill McLaughlin)
FC-06-020: FSH 1640.72 - Research Council (Doug Adams)
University Curriculum Committees:
FC-06-021: College of Letters, Arts, and Social Sciences, Department of English,
Certificate of Completion in Professional Writing (Gordon Thomas)
VII. Special Orders.
VIII. Unfinished Business and General Orders.
IX. New Business.
Professor Robert Zemetra, Chair 2005-2006, Faculty Council
Minutes of 2005-2006 FC Meeting #12, November 15, 2005
University of Idaho
FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES
2005-2006 Meeting #12, Tuesday, November 15th, 2005
Present: Adams (w/o vote), Beard, Bechinski, Crowley, Exon, Gaffney, Greever, Hubbard, McCollough, McDaniel,
McLaughlin, McMurtry, Morgan, Morris, (w/o vote, sitting in for Baker), Munson, Williams, Woolston, Young,
Absent: Baker, Parrish, Reid
A quorum being present, Chair Robert Zemetra called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. in the Brink Hall Faculty
Minutes: It was moved and seconded (Beard, Bechinski) to approve the minutes of November 8 th as distributed. The
motion carried unanimously.
Chair’s Report: Chair Zemetra announced that there had been an excellent pool of applicants for the position of the
University of Idaho’s NCAA faculty representative. The selection committee had sent three names to the president
and the president’s selection would be announced very soon.
The chair also spoke of the process whereby mid-year raises were to be awarded. Of the four percent available there
would be a 1% across-the-board increase awarded to all who had “meets expectations” or higher on their annual
performance review. The other 3% would be awarded for merit and retention. The latter category was to be
interpreted broadly, i.e., it might be awarded not only to counter offers of higher salaries elsewhere but also raise
salaries to the point where the faculty member would not be looking elsewhere. He further announced that the
decision had been made to use only last year’s annual performance evaluation in determining raises. This decision
ran counter to the council’s advice to the provost given previously. The secretary was asked to read the relevant
section of the Faculty-Staff Handbook (3320 A-2-g). The council agreed that that section did not prohibit using
multi-year averages when merit had been previously appropriated and awarded; it only enjoined the use of multi-
year averages when merit had not been appropriated. The chair suggested that the council return to this issue under
the category of new business.
Finally, he announced that a new search committee was being formed to search for a new ombuds and asked for two
volunteers to serve from faculty council. Barbara Greever and John Munson agreed to serve.
Provost’s Report: Linda Morris, vice provost for academic affairs, sitting in for the unavoidably absent provost,
announced that SBOE technology grants are now being administered by her office. Friday’s Register would have the
announcement that pre-proposals would be due January 23rd and final proposals due February 20th. She also
mentioned the Stamats survey which had been delivered by e-mail to all faculty, staff, and students. The survey
might at times read a little oddly to faculty and staff since it had been worded “from the student’s point of view” so
as to make responses compatible with other surveys already done with prospective students. Stamats would be
holding two open forums on Tuesday, December 6 th, one from 1:00-2:30 on why the UI is marketing itself and
another from 3:00-4:30 on what the market research has shown.
She further announced that this Thursday there would be another session of University Matters on tenure and
promotion matters open to all department chairs.
She reminded council members that the university’s enrollment for this fall was down 2% and that drop in
enrollment had undesirable fiscal implications. The university was beginning a campaign to have all advisors
contact their advisees who were currently enrolled but not yet registered for spring semester and urge them to
register soon. As is our long-standing policy the university would seek to survey those students who have chosen not
to return so as to better understand why they were not returning.
Finally the discussion returned to Digital Measures. Vice Provost Morris, responding to questions, noted the security
measures that Digital measures employees and noted that only designated administrators within a college would
have access to the data for their college (and not for data from other colleges). Further questions from council
members suggested there were still questions as to how the data would be compared across the university as a whole
2005-2006 Faculty Council – Meeting #12 – November 15, 2005 – Page 2
and, indeed, what the definitions of kinds of research, say, meant. Vice Provost Morris said that she would be one of
the first to test the system when it was up and running in a few weeks. Professor Gunter agreed to join her as one of
a small testing group.
FC-06-018: FSH 3270, “Membership Dues and Licensing Fees”: Professor Jeff Young, chair of the University
Budget and Finance Committee, provided background on this proposal which came to Faculty Council as a
seconded motion from that committee. The proposal was intended to clarify the governor’s executive order that said
state agencies could not pay professional dues unless they were required for the performance of one’s job. He
pointed out that the state and university were in agreement that any money in the university’s coffers was “state
money” regardless of its source. This proposal would permit, though not require, payment of dues and fees for
individual memberships to professional organizations to be paid out of Y-accounts if participation in the
professional organization was part of the faculty members annual position description. In the ensuing discussion it
was pointed out that currently it was possible to pay for group memberships in professional organizations with state
money but that that was an expensive way to pay for a membership when only a single faculty member was
involved. It was also pointed out that the proposal allowed for the payment of such professional dues and fees out of
grant monies as long as it was a part of the grant proposal. The motion carried unanimously.
FC-06-019: NOI, “College of Education Restructure from Three Divisions to Four Departments”: Jeanne
Christiansen, dean of the College of Education, provided the background on this seconded motion from UCC that
would reorganize the College of Education from three divisions into four departments. The reorganization is to
allow for more tightly focused units with a more even distribution of faculty members. She provided a handout that
detailed the shifts in FTE’s of administrators, faculty, and students. The reorganization would require no additional
resources to the college nor would it shift resources from teaching and research to administration since the three full-
time administrators of the current divisions would be replaced by four three-quarter time administrators in the
proposed departments (the other quarter-time being devoted to teaching or research as the case may be). The motion
December Graduation List: It was moved and seconded (Morgan, Greever) to approve the list provided by the
registrar of students graduating in December. The motion carried unanimously.
FC-06-017: “Compassionate Tenure Clock”: The council then turned its attention back to the proposed changes to
FSH 3520 that would provide potential extensions to the “tenure clock” for in individual difficult, disruptive, or
overwhelming life situations. The university’s Affirmative Action Committee had provided council with a letter
supporting the adoption of such a policy which had been distributed to council members. Professor Jo Ellen Force,
president of the university’s chapter of Athena, spoke to the importance of having such a policy as did Margrit von
Braun, dean of the college of Graduate Studies. Also speaking in favor of the resolution, or perhaps even a
potentially stronger revision thereof, was Professor Sarah Nelson of the Department of Foreign Languages and
Literatures. The general theme was that adoption of this policy was one way by which the university could
demonstrate its seriousness about diversifying its workforce and its concomitant need to be family-friendly.
Professor Möller, chair of the Faculty Affairs Committee, responding to questions, said again that there were risks
that the policy might be abused but that there was a robust review process built in. He also reminded council that
this policy had already been adopted by Boise State University.
There were still concerns that adoption of this policy was not the best solution to the problem. One councilor was
concerned that it might actually create pay disparities between those who had availed themselves of the policy and
those who didn’t and provide a false sense of security to those availing themselves of it.
It was moved and seconded (Crowley, Beard) to amend the proposal by striking the first sentence of proposed 3520
G-9-2 and the initial “other” of the second sentence. The section would thus read:
Requests for extension of the probationary period with respect to childbirth or adoption must be made within
one year of birth or adoption. Other Rrequests should be made in a timely manner, proximate to the events or
circumstances which occasion the request. All requests should include appropriate documentation.
The motion to amend carried unanimously.
2005-2006 Faculty Council – Meeting #12 – November 15, 2005 – Page 3
In what turned out to be the final comment, a councilor pointed out that no policy could “lock down” all
possibilities. Nor should one think that any policy could be created that was perfect from the beginning. He
reminded council that committee work is done by volunteers who receive little or no recognition for their service
also pointing out that if this policy was adopted and found not to work as intended, it could be amended at that time
(Professor Möller, bowing vigorously in response to this comment, brought some levity to the issue.) The councilor
moved to call the question and encouraged everyone to vote positively. The motion to call for the question passed
with the requisite two-thirds majority. The main motion as amended carried (15-1 with 1 abstention).
Resolution on Calculation of Mid-Year Salary Raises: The council returned to the discussion of the appropriate
method whereby to calculate mid-year salary raises. The following resolution was moved and seconded (Gunter,
WHEREAS, the Faculty-Staff Handbook, section 3320 A-2-g (below) enjoins the use of a multi-year average
of annual performance reviews in calculating raises when merit money has not been provided by the state
legislative appropriation process, it in no way prohibits the use of a multi-year average when merit money has
been provided by the legislature (i.e., if p, then q does not entail if ~p, then ~q);
WHEREAS, money allocated by the legislative appropriation process over the past few years has been no
greater than 1%;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Faculty Council urges the provost and deans to use a three-year
average of annual performance evaluations in calculating salary increases to be awarded in December of this
The motion carried unanimously.
Adjournment: It being 5:10 p.m., it was moved and seconded (Beard, Greever) to adjourn. The motion carried
Douglas Q. Adams
Faculty Secretary and Secretary to Faculty Council
A. FUNCTION. The Research Council is the faculty’s standing committee that oversees the implementation of
discovery, creativity, and research policies [see 5100 and 5200] and resolves disagreements about the interpretation
or implementation of those policies. The Human Assurances Committee (HAC) is a standing subcommittee of the
Research Council. For information on its function, structure, and membership, call the Research Office. [See also
5200 D and E.]
B. STRUCTURE. One faculty member from each of the colleges, four members appointed by the president to
ensure adequate representation from faculty constituencies that are most active in discovery, creativity, and research
policies while ensuring that faculty engaged in multidisciplinary activities are represented, and (without vote) vice
president for research and dean of library services (or the latter=s designee). The representatives from the colleges
are designated in accordance with procedures determined by their respective faculties. The vice president for
research serves as chair of the Research Council. [ed. 7-97]
TO: Faculty Council
FROM: Douglas Adams
SUBJECT: Summer/Late Fall Committee Appointments
DATE: November 14, 2005
The following appointments/changes were made during the summer/late fall to Faculty Council
Faculty Member Appointment Committee Name
Carl Hunt (finish Marcia Niles term) Member Academic Hearing Board
Eric Brauns (finish Robert Martin term) Member Administrative Hearing Board
Lynn Baird (finish Sandra Haarsager term) Administrator Dismissal Hearings Committee Panels
Kathy Aiken Administrator Honors Program Committee
Rick Edgeman (replace Mary Pickard) Faculty Honors Program Committee
Scott Wood Faculty Intellectual Property
Kevin Johnston (George Canney declined) Faculty (Educ.) International Affairs Committee
Daniel Noble (Sara Wicks declined) Staff Juntura
Steve Chandler Faculty Officer Education Committee
Mike Pollastro Faculty Officer Education Committee
Michael Greenlee Faculty (Law) Safety & Loss-Control Committee
Still looking for:
Committee on Committees, faculty
Honors Program Committee (possible faculty replacement)
Information Technology Committee, Faculty (Educ.)
University Committee for General Education, Core Discovery Rep.
COLLEGE OF LETTERS, ARTS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES
Proposed Catalog Changes
October 3, 2005
IDAHO STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION
NOTICE OF INTENT
To initiate a
NEW, EXPANDED, COOPERATIVE, DISCONTINUED, PROGRAM COMPONENT OR OFF-CAMPUS INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM OR
INSTITUTION SUBMITTING PROPOSAL: UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO
NAME OF COLLEGE, SCHOOL, OR COLLEGE OF LETTERS, ARTS, AND SOCIAL SCIENCES
NAME OF DEPARTMENT(S) OR AREA(S): DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH
Indicate if this Notice of Intent (NOI) is for an Academic or Professional – Technical Program
ACADEMIC X PROFESSIONAL - TECHNICAL
A New, Expanded, Cooperative, Contract, or Off-Campus Instructional Program or
Administrative/Research Unit (circle one) leading to:
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION IN PROFESSIONAL WRITING
PROPOSED STARTING DATE: SUMMER 2006
FOR NEW PROGRAMS: For Other Activity:
Program (i.e., degree) Title & CIP Program Component
Off-Campus Activity/Resident Center
Signed by Joe Zeller 7/6/05
College Dean (Institution) Date VP Research & Graduate Date
Chief Fiscal Officer (Institution) Date State Administrator, SDPTE Date
Chief Academic Officer Date Chief Academic Officer, OSBE Date
President Date SBOE/OSBE Approval Date
1. Briefly describe the nature of the request e.g., is this a new program (degree, program, or certificate) or program
component (e.g., new, discontinued, modified, addition to an existing program or option).
This Certificate of Completion in Professional Writing will offer a chance for students in various majors to receive certification
of their expertise in writing and producing documents for the business, technical, and professional world. To complete the
certificate, students will take courses from a variety of disciplines dealing with technical or professional communication, practice,
theory, and ethics.
2. Provide a statement of need for program or a program modification. Include student and state need, demand, and
This certificate will offer students a “value added” means of marketing themselves when searching for jobs. The University of
Idaho offers no other certificate in writing or professional communication.
3. Briefly describe how the institution will ensure the quality of the program (e.g., accreditation, professional societies,
licensing boards, etc.).
To receive the Certificate of Completion in Professional Communication students will need to receive a grade of B or higher in
each of the courses taken for certification. All the courses are already staffed by trained, qualified professors or instructors, and
the courses are offered through five accredited departments. (The requirements are attached.)
4. Identify similar programs offered within the state of Idaho or in the region by other colleges/universities. If the
proposed request is similar to another program, provide a rationale for the duplication.
This University of Idaho Certificate in Professional Writing is unique to the State of Idaho higher education system. Boise State
University offers a Certificate of Completion in Technical Writing, which has a focus different from this certificate of
completion, and it is not available to University of Idaho students.
5. Describe how this request is consistent with the State Board of Education's policy or role and mission of the
institution. (i.e. centrality).
Direct efforts to continuously improve the quality of Idaho’s education, training, rehabilitation and
information/research services to gain program competitiveness, high levels of achievement, and a well-informed
citizenry (8-Year Plan for Delivery of Academic Programs, 2004, p.13).
Ensure education, training, rehabilitation and information/research services are relevant to the needs of Idaho’s
citizens, workforce, business, industry, and local, state, and federal government (8-Year Plan for Delivery of Academic
Programs, 2004, p. 13).
6. Is the proposed program in the 8-year Plan? Indicate below.
Yes X No
This is a first step towards developing a degree program in professional writing (8-Year Plan for Delivery of Academic
Programs, 2004 p.70).
7. Resources--Faculty/Staff/Space Needs/Capital Outlay.
This proposed Certificate of Completion in Professional Writing requires no funding
Estimated Fiscal Impact FY FY FY Total
A. Source of Funds NA NA NA NA
1. Appropriated-reallocation 0 0 0 0
2. Appropriated – New 0 0 0 0
3. Federal 0 0 0 0
4. Other: 0 0 0 0
TOTAL: 0 0 0 0
B. Nature of Funds
1. Recurring * 0 0 0 0
2. Non-recurring ** 0 0 0 0
TOTAL: 0 0 0 0
Certificate of Completion in Professional Writing
The Certificate of Completion in Professional Writing certifies the student has taken a wide range of writing courses that
provide a broad, comprehensive knowledge about the writing process useful for technical and professional writing situations.
This Certificate of Completion in Professional Writing will require that students take 15 credits (5 courses) selected from each
of the 5 areas below. To receive the Certificate of Completion in Professional Writing, students must receive a grade of B or
better in each of the courses taken for the certificate.
1. English 317, Technical Writing.
2. English 207, Persuasive Writing, or English 209, Inquiry-Based Writing.
3. English 309, Advanced Prose Writing; English 313, Business Writing; or English 316, Environmental Writing.
4. JAMM 350, Public Relations Writing; JAMM 425, Feature Article Writing; JAMM 428, Environmental Journalism;
CSS 387, Environmental Communication Skills; Comm 235, Organizational Communication; Comm 347,
Persuasion; Comm 432 Gender and Communication; Comm 433, Organizational Communication Theory and
Research; English 309, Advanced Prose Writing; English 313, Business Writing; or English 316, Environmental
5. Philosophy 202, Introduction to Symbolic Logic, Philosophy 351, Philosophy of Science, Philosophy 450, Ethics and
Reasoning in Scientific Research and Practice; Philosophy 452, Environmental Philosophy; or English 440,
After a student has taken the five courses required for the Certificate of Completion in Professional Writing and received a grade
of B or better in each course, the student will bring (either in person or by email) to the Director of Writing or the Assistant
Director of Writing, Department of English, the following information:
1. A list of the courses the student took to fulfill the certificate requirements;
2. The student’s name as he or she wants it to appear on the certificate; and
3. The mailing address to which the student wants the certificate sent.
The required five areas offer a breadth of courses necessary to give students varied experience with writing in different settings
and for different audiences.
Area 1 is necessary for the experience with either technical writing or business writing.
Area 2 provides breadth through sophomore level English department writing courses.
Area 3 provides breadth through junior level English department writing courses.
Area 4 provides breadth in mostly junior level writing courses. By listing courses in JAMM (Journalism and Mass Media), CSS
(Conservation Social Science), and Comm (Communication Studies), we make it possible for students with those majors to earn
the certificate by just taking a couple extra courses. By listing the 300 level English courses again here, we make it possible for
English majors to earn the certificate. Asking English majors to take the JAMM, CSS, or Comm courses is not reasonable
because those courses have pre-requisites of another course or courses in those majors.
Area 5 provides breadth through courses in philosophy or through English 440, which deals with the philosophy of rhetoric
What is the value of this?
For the Department of English, this certificate points the way towards developing a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Professional
Writing. For students, it offers a “value added” certificate to go with their degree that may help them get a job. This last
argument may be the best reason for offering this certificate.