Whereas, An AI@
grade is intended for incomplete course work that is to be completed later; and
Whereas, Current rules allow for AI@
grades that are never changed into a letter grade; and
Whereas, Such use of an AI@
grade may amount in practice to a very late withdrawal and therefore constitute
an abuse of the intention of the AI@
grade;
Be It Resolved, That an AI@
grade must be changed by the instructor to a letter grade within one calendar
year or before the student=s
graduation, whichever comes first. If no such change is done, the AI@
grade shall automatically become an AF@
grade at that time.
Approved by the Faculty Senate on November 21, 1996. Approved by Provost Whitehouse on December 30, 1996.
Whereas, the purpose of a great university is to provide educational
excellence to its students, to conduct research critical to future development
and to serve its community, and
Whereas, tenure is essential for an excellent university to attract and
retain the best faculty, making the State University System competitive with
other university systems, and is critical in ensuring faculty academic freedom;
Be it resolved, that the Board of Regents be commended for its
affirmation of the concept of tenure, and
Be it further resolved, that the UCF Faculty Senate
strongly endorses the concept of accountability of all faculty and believes that
a thorough, comprehensive and continuous review of performance currently exists
and should be retained. The existing process already includes the review of
tenured faculty. The concerns about nonperformance, for which the proposed
Post-Tenure Review process is intended, should be dealt with through the
existing periodic review process. It is therefore unnecessary to institute a new
system of post-tenure review.
We affirm that the faculty accept the responsibility for and should be fully
involved in the process of review.
Approved by the Faculty Senate on December 5, 1996. Approved by Provost Whitehouse on December 6, 1996.
Whereas, The University's commitment to diversity and
inclusiveness was reiterated in Faculty Senate Resolution 1995-1996-01; and
Whereas, Faculty Senate Resolution 1995-1996-01 resulted
in a faculty committee to study inclusion of diversity in curriculum and to
further refine the General Education Program to give the University a
competitive edge; and
Whereas, There needs to be flexibility at the college,
department, and program levels in interpreting the best way to address and
implement a diversity requirement; and
Whereas, UCF students have varying General Education
Program experiences; and
Whereas, There is currently no faculty committee with
exclusive jurisdiction over issues related to "general education" at
UCF;
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Faculty Senate establish a
General Education Oversight Committee as a reporting committee and with
exclusive jurisdiction over all issues related to "general education"
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the University establish a
"General Education Program Diversity Requirement". Students must take
one of the diversity courses within the General Education Program and approved
by the General Education Oversight Committee to satisfy this requirement.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the University establish a
"Diversity Graduation Requirement". This requirement can be satisfied
by meeting the "General Education Program Diversity Requirement" OR by
activities or courses in a major, or by other courses jointly approved by a
program and the General Education Oversight Committee.
FINALLY, BE IT RESOLVED, That the University utilize a
"learning communities model" by which some students can complete parts
of the General Education Program requirements.
Approved by the Faculty Senate on March 20, 1997. Approved by Provost Whitehouse on April 15, 1997.
Whereas, Ucf has recently undergone months of strategic
planning, involving scores of people from both inside and outside the University
Community, and
Whereas, As faculty we are concerned with both the equity
and efficacy of funding for the university=s
operating units and programs, as well as with implementation of the strategic
plan; and
Whereas, We recognize that implementing the university=s
strategic plans depends upon actions taken not just by the central
administration, but also at the level of the colleges and operating units as
well;
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED, That, while the Senate supports
the use of formula funding for basic, across-the-board distributions in support
of the on-going operating activities of the University=s
colleges and other units, it also recognizes that strategic initiatives inherent
in the University=s strategic plans
cannot be pursued entirely through formula-driven funding models.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,
That, accordingly, the Senate
urges that processes be developed by which specific initiatives and programs can
be funded by means other than through enrollment-driven or other formula-funding
approaches. Development of such processes is appropriate for the University wide
budget, for the academic affairs budget, and for the budgets of individual
colleges and operating units, and might include the refinement and adaptation of
the existing practice of providing Aspecials@
within the University-wide and Academic Affairs budgets.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That it is vitally important such
processes assure maximum participation by faculty from within their operating
units and departments, and that such processes are maximally visible to and
understood by all members of the University community. It should be understood
also that this resolution does not constitute a lack of support from the faculty
for the aims and purposes of formula-based budgeting appropriately employed;
rather it suggests enhancement and refinement of such models in order that they
may be more effective, equitable, and supportive of the University=s
strategic goals.
Approved by the Faculty Senate on April 24, 1997. Approved by Provost Whitehouse on June 3, 1997.
Whereas, Efforts aimed at re-examining the University=s
budget processes are now beginning, and the Senate supports such efforts to
synchronize planning and budgeting; and
Whereas, The Senate believes that effective budgeting
requires that all units and parties involved in the budget process understand
it; and
Whereas, The Senate believes that a spirit of openness
regarding budgeting should prevail, not only at the University level but at the
level of the colleges and individual academic units as well;
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED, That the Senate urges that the
processes and criteria by which budget allocations are made and results thereof,
both at the University level and within all colleges and units, should be
clearly communicated to all the participants in that process, including faculty
at the departmental and program levels.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,
That to this end, it is
recommended that a formal mechanism, or mechanisms, be established for fostering
such communication. Such mechanisms should include, but be not necessarily
limited to, annual, formal written or oral reporting by the President or Provost
to the Faculty Senate, and by similar reporting by the deans and other heads of
the various colleges and operating units to their respective faculties.
Approved by the Faculty Senate on April 24, 1997. Approved by Provost Whitehouse on June 3, 1997.
