FSEC_12m07-08

a. The Executive Committee discussed a series of e-mails that they had received about the handling of a case of plagiarism. Chairperson Miller said that Vice Provost Pasquerella had asked for a few minutes under announcements at the Senate meeting to raise the issue of academic integrity and the importance of reporting instances of plagiarism to the Dean of Students’ Office (8.27.21)

b. Chairperson Miller reported that he had been invited by Ms. Hopkins to a meeting to discuss the process for selecting a student from URI to serve as the student member on the Board of Governors.

c. Chairperson Miller reported that Professor Michael Rice had agreed to represent the FSEC at a meeting of the Master Plan Review Team because Vice Chairperson Martin had been unable to attend. A copy of Professor Rice’s report on the meeting was circulated for information.

d. Chairperson Miller announced that the December 20 meeting of the JSPC had been cancelled. The members of the JSPC had been invited to meet on December 19 with the Council of Deans on the Branding Initiative instead.

a. Searches: The Executive Committee reviewed their meeting with President Carothers on the Provost candidates for members of the FSEC who had not been able to attend.

Chairperson Miller said that the search for the Dean of Engineering was at the stage at which the Affirmative Action Office reviews the committee’s list of candidates who had been eliminated by the committee.

b. Administrator Evaluation: Ms. Grubman reported that the Administrator Evaluation process was proceeding in a timely manner. She said that the evaluation letters for Dean Seemann were being converted into PDF format for the Seemann AEC and that she and Professor Rosen would meet with them on November 16 to answer any questions and deliver the letters on cds. She said that Professor Rosen would emphasize the importance of confidentiality at that time.

Ms. Grubman explained that the administrator evaluation process for Dean McKinney was about two weeks behind Dean Seemann’s and that the deadline for receipt of letters for Dean McKinney was November 15.

c. Committees: The Executive Committee discussed the charges and proposed memberships for the three JSPC subcommittees that were proposed to follow up on issues raised by NEASC at the November 2 JSPC meeting. It was agreed that the faculty members of the JSPC believed that the emphasis should be on academic excellence and that issues of access should follow from the academic quality mission. They agreed that the JSPC should discuss the issues further to ensure that definitions and goals were clear to everyone.

Senator Beauvais reported on the November 9 meeting of the Academic Program Review Committee. She said that the APRC had agreed to follow up on suggestions raised by the Council of Deans and to consider how the AIIM data might be used more strategically.

d. Student/Faculty Ratio: The Executive Committee agreed to pursue efforts to obtain the data upon which the 19-1 ratio of students to faculty had been determined.

e. Professor Logan’s position papers: The Executive Committee agreed that some of the issues they were pursuing were consistent with the issues raised in “Learning for a New Culture” and “Waking Up in the Century of Limits.”