Faculty Senate Executive Committee Meeting #18 – November 17, 2010


1.   The meeting was called to order at 10:05 a.m. on Wednesday, November 17, 2010 in the second floor conference room in the Alumni Center, Chairperson Swallow presiding. All members were present.


2.   The Minutes from Executive Committee Meeting #15, October 27, 2010, were approved as revised.


3.   The Executive Committee reviewed the Agenda for Faculty Senate Meeting #3, November 18, 2010 in preparation for the next dayís meeting. It was noted that although there had been interest at the previous Faculty Senate meeting about terms of office for the Executive Committee, very few Senators had participated in the discussion on Sakai.


      Chairperson Swallow agreed to draft two different models of terms of office for discussion at the Faculty Senate meeting. The Executive Committee decided that the time would be set aside for discussion only and that no recommendation from the FSEC would be forthcoming on November 18.


4.   The Executive Committee confirmed the following topics for their November 22 meeting with President Dooley:


a.     The Board of Governorsí Strategic Plan


      b.   How the Presidentís vision relates to the Academic Plan and practical applications of the vision.


Chairperson Swallow reported that he and Vice Chairperson Eaton were scheduled to meet with the President the following morning. It was agreed that discussion with the President on November 18 should concern the transition and the Presidentís plans for the spring semester.


5.   Updates on Committee work:


a.   Joint Committee on Academic Planning (JCAP): Vice Chairperson Eaton reported that the JCAP meeting scheduled for that morning had been cancelled because much of the work being done was within subcommittees. She suggested that JCAP might want to meet as a group less often to give the subcommittees more time to work in smaller groups.


b.   Strategic Budget and Planning Council (SBPC): Chairperson Swallow said that the next meeting of the SBPC was scheduled for November 23 at 3:00 p.m. and that both he and Vice Chairperson Eaton planned to attend.


c.   Teaching Effectiveness Committee: Senator Ciccomascolo reported that the committee was developing questions for the survey on the IDEA and had agreed that their next step was to initiate collaboration with the AAUP.


d.     University College and General Education Committee (UCGE): Senator Larsen reported that the UCGE Committee agreed that they needed to meet more frequently and had scheduled a half-day retreat for December 10. Discussion ensued with regard to the need for a transitional plan even though the UCGE Committee was in the process of meeting with colleges to get feedback on their transition proposal.


The Executive Committee discussed whether the committee would be able to meet their initial deadline. Chairperson Swallow said that he would draft a memo to the UCGE Committee to encourage them to meet the spring 2011 deadline for proposing revisions of the General Education Program in order to allow a new program to go into effect for students entering in the fall 2012.


e.   Learning Outcomes Oversight Committee (LOOC): Senator Barbour reported that in discussions about assessing the Grand Challenges courses, it was mentioned that the College of Arts and Sciences was trying to substantially increase the number of faculty members teaching the Grand Challenges courses. It had bee noted that attempting to have enough instructors teach Grand Challenges was creating a hardship for departments attempting to offer required courses. The Executive Committee agreed that it was such an important issue that they would bring it up with the Provost in lieu of another issue they had identified for discussion with him.


f.    Council for Research: Chairperson Swallow said that he had not been able to schedule a meeting with Professor Ordonez and Vice President Alfonso to discuss the revision of the Intellectual Property Policy.   He said that he had attended the Councilís meeting and had urged that whatever policy they bring to the Senate for approval is unambiguous and presented with the context of IP policies at comparable institutions. He reported that Dr. Markin had indicated that she would try to find out how other institutions handle the distribution of IP royalties.


6.   Provost DeHayes and Vice Provost Beauvais joined the Executive Committee at 11:15. The following matters were considered:


a.     The Executive Committee requested that the Provost consider additional steps to continue making the budget allocation process within Academic Affairs become more transparent to faculty. In response, Provost DeHayes suggested that members of the FSEC attend the Council of Deans meeting at which Deans make their budget request presentations and again at the meeting at which the Provost reports his decisions.


b.     The Executive Committee suggested that the process for developing capital projects priorities become more open to promote a better understanding with regard to reasons some projects are given higher priority than others. Provost DeHayes explained that the process was under the auspices of the Vice President for Administration and agreed there could be better coordination with academic affairs. He said that it would be useful if the process for developing the list of priorities for capital expenditures were understood by the academic community. In addition, it would be helpful for the community to have a better understanding about the effect that unanticipated circumstances might have on final decisions.


c.     Members of the FSEC expressed concern that efforts to increase the number of Grand Challenge courses for the fall 2011 might be placing undue hardship on departments that are already having difficulty meeting the needs of their majors. Vice Provost Beauvais said that while colleges had been asked to increase the number of Grand Challenges courses it was understood that such efforts might not be possible. Provost DeHayes emphasized that if fewer elective courses were offered it would free up faculty members to offer Grand Challenges.


The meeting was adjourned at 12: 00 noon.


                                          Respectfully submitted,


                                          Sheila Black Grubman