Whereas, Dr. Karen L. Smith was an exemplary teacher and motivator who served as Director of the Faculty for Teaching and Learning, contributing her intellect, positive spirit, enthusiasm and vision to the Center and
Whereas, Dr. Karen L. Smith created and promoted a vibrant, outstanding teaching, learning, and research format within which the faculty of the University of Central Florida have benefited as evidenced by increasing teaching performance, evaluation ratings, award-winning and creative teaching programs, and
Whereas, Dr. Karen L. Smith's insightful ability to envision advancements in collaborative technological pedagogy in the higher education classroom, having established a high standard of excellence for centers of teaching and learning throughout the United States, has put UCF in the national spotlight as one of the most advanced universities using pedagogical technology, the Faculty Senate of the University of Central Florida, hereby
Resolves that the Faculty Senate Resolution 1994-95-12, Naming University Facilities, prohibiting the naming of a facility for a retired or deceased employee "until two years following the date of…death" be waived, and The Faculty Senate hereby
Further resolves that the Faculty Center for Teaching and Learning at the University of Central Florida be renamed as the: Karen L. Smith Faculty Center for Teaching and Learning.
Approved by Faculty Senate on August 23, 2001 Approved by Provost on October 2, 2001
Whereas, senior professors significantly contribute to the University and the College goals and objectives, and
Whereas, senior professors are often role models for other faculty; and,
Whereas, senior professors are evaluated in the areas of research, teaching and service; and
Whereas, senior professors should be recognized by the University for their outstanding performance,
Be It Resolved that the following annual awards be established for faculty at the rank of Professor: Distinguished Professor of Research, Distinguished Professor of Teaching and Distinguished Professor of Service.
Approved by Faculty Senate on October 25, 2001
Memo from: Dr. Gary Whitehouse on September 4, 2002
After discussions with President Hitt, the deans, and others, we have decided to adopt Resolution 2001-2002 in principle and view it as a charge to review the faculty award system at UCF. Dr. Frank Juge has been asked to chair a committee of faculty members and administrators who will develop the criteria and means for implementation of the concept.
Thank you for motivating us to proceed with this important study.
Whereas, mentoring is a vital component of teaching, research and service; and
Whereas, the current mentoring reward system is non-formal and generally inadequate; and
Whereas, compensation inequities exist between prospective mentors and mentees,
Be It Resolved, that action be taken to set up a formal mentoring system at UCF with an associated reward structure, and that information in regard to mentoring activities be included in a faculty member's annual evaluation.
Resolution presented to the Steering Committee by the Personnel Committee on November 8, 2001. Will be presented to the Senate on November 29, 2001
Defeated by the Faculty Senate on November 29, 2001
Whereas, the current UCF catalog indicates that there is no minimum number of hours for a minor at UCF, and
Whereas, many majors in Arts and Sciences require 18 hours for a minor to be used in the degree, and
Whereas, there exist minors in other colleges that have less than 18 hours, but faculty and students assume that the minors will count, but do not where an 18-hour minor is required,
Be it resolved that the UCF catalog policy be revised as follows:
Baccalaureate minors must contain a minimum of 18-semester hours credit.
To better communicate this requirement, all minors should be revisited to ensure this requirement is met.
Approved by the UPCC February 5, 2002.
Approved by the Steering Committee on February 7, 2002
Approved by the Faculty Senate on February 21, 2002
Whereas, the current UCF catalog indicates that Gordon Rule policy requires that a grade of "C" (2.0) or better is required to receive Gordon Rule credit at UCF, and
Whereas, many faculty and students assume that a "C-" (1.75) will count to satisfy the Gordon Rule,
Be it resolved that the Gordon Rule grade policy be revised as follows:
Baccalaureate students must receive a minimum grade of "C-" to receive Gordon Rule credit at UCF.
To better communicate this requirement, all majors should include this in their program descriptions.
Approved by the UPCC February 5, 2002.
Approved by the Steering Committee on February 7, 2002
Approved by the Faculty Senate on February 21, 2002
Approved by Provost Whitehouse on May 2, 2002
Whereas, all faculty utilize computer generated evaluations to assess annual teaching contributions,
Whereas, these evaluations are often used as supporting information to support faculty efforts toward promotion, tenure and numerous award criteria; and,
Whereas, there is no formal policy for either addressing or recognizing computer generated errors when and if such errors should occur;
Be It Resolved that a policy to address this problem with computer generated student evaluations be created allowing faculty recourse creating a formal procedure available to faculty to address or grieve this situation. See Appendix A for a sample of such a procedure.
Approved by the UPCC February 5, 2002.
Approved by the Steering Committee on February 7, 2002
Approved by the Faculty Senate on February 21, 2002
Approved by Provost Whitehouse on May 2, 2002
Memo from: Dr. Gary Whitehouse on September 4, 2002
President Hitt, the deans, and I have reviewed Resolution 2002-2002-7 "Computer Generated Evaluation Scoring Errors" and agree that there needs to be an appeal process should a problem occur. In collecting data, only two cases were found where errors had been reported, and in both cases the errors were corrected. However, we do agree with the Faculty Senate that a formal appeal process should be available.
The formal procedure to be used will be the faculty appeals process in place, namely to direct an appeal to one's chair and dean. If the faculty member receives no satisfaction at either of these levels, the faculty member should then appeal to the undergraduate dean (for undergraduate courses) or graduate dean (for graduate courses).
Thank you for alerting us to this important issue.
Whereas, student perceptions of faculty performance are currently available for student review; and,
Whereas, students are requesting greater and more convenient access for review of course evaluations,
Be it resolved that the committee supports the recommendation that the SUMMARY sheet for student perceptions of evaluation be placed on line.
Approved by Steering Committee on February 7, 2002
On February 21, 2002, Faculty Senate returned this resolution to the committee for further word changes.
