UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND

Kingston, Rhode Island

FACULTY SENATE

MINUTES

Faculty Senate Executive Committee Meeting #22 ≠ February 16, 2005

1. The meeting was called to order at 1:00 p.m. on Wednesday, February 16, 2005 in the third floor conference room in Green Hall, Chairperson Boudreaux-Bartels presiding. All members were present.

2. The Minutes of Executive Committee Meetings #20, February 9, 2005 and #21, February 14, 2005 were reviewed. Following discussion, the Minutes of Meeting #21 were approved. Approval of the Minutes of Meeting #20 was postponed pending further revisions.

3. Announcements/Correspondence:

a. Ms. Grubman distributed copies of the memorandum on Facilities, Planning and Programming FY 06 from Jerry Sidio to Deans, Directors and Department Heads as requested previously.

b. Vice Chairperson Rosen reported on the February 11, 2005 Meeting of the Board of Governors for Higher Education Academic and Student Affairs Committee. He said that the first two items of business had concerned proprietary schools. Of greater interest to URI was an update on the joint admissions agreement from representatives of CCRI. He circulated a copy of the brochure developed by CCRI. Concern was raised that the brochure stated that students with 3.5 grade point averages transferring to either Rhode Island College or the University of Rhode Island would receive a 30% reduction in tuition. The reductions were to begin with GPA 3.00 to 3.24 at a 10% reduction and 3.25-3.49 at 20%. It was agreed that this policy would be expensive and should not be borne by the receiving institutions. The Executive Committee agreed to add this issue to their list of discussion topics with the Provost.

Vice Chairperson Rosen also reported that Dean Richmond and her counterpart at Rhode Island College had reported on advisement programs at their respective institutions. Materials related to the two reports were circulated for information.

c. The Executive Committee discussed the appointment of three faculty members to the Administrator Evaluation Committee for Dean Dayle Joseph. As Administrator Evaluation Coordinator, Vice Chairperson Rosen recused himself from the deliberations. Following discussion, Professors Jean Miller, Donna Schwartz-Barcott, and Mary Sullivan were selected as the Faculty Senateπs appointees to the Joseph AEC.

d. Senator Rice encouraged members of the Executive Committee to read an article titled ≥Study: Market forces luring colleges away from mission≤ by Jennifer Jordan, which had appeared in that morningπs edition of The Providence Journal (February 16, 2005) as well as read the referenced report at the Futures Project website: http://www.futuresproject.org/publications/Correcting_Course.pdf.

e. Chairperson Boudreaux-Bartels announced that Senator John Leo and Mr. Vince Petronio had asked to meet with the Executive Committee. They wanted to discuss a proposed resolution about military recruitment on campus under new business at the February 24 Faculty Senate meeting. She said that Senator Leo and Mr. Petronio were scheduled to meet with the Executive Committee at 2:00 p.m. on February 23.

4. The Executive Committee considered the following matters of continuing concern:

a. (Murphy) Program Review Model: Chairperson Boudreaux-Bartels thanked members of the Executive Committee for their painstaking review of the questions and possible responses to them over the last weeks as they continued to refine and adapt the Murphy Program Review Model instrument to make it more relevant and useful for the University. She said that she hoped that further progress would be made when the FSEC subcommittee meets on February 22.

Chairperson Boudreaux-Bartels announced that four faculty members had agreed to review the revisions and make suggestions about the model. These are Senators Jerry Cohen from Psychology, Glen Ramsay from Economics, and Tim Tyrell from Resource Economics, along with Professor Mary Sullivan from the College of Nursing.

5. The Executive Committee met with Provost Swan from 1:30 to 2:15. The following matters were considered:

a. Formation of search committees: Members of the Executive Committee expressed concern about the rapid appointment of search committees for the Dean of Admissions and the Vice Provost for Academic Affairs and noted that very few faculty members had been appointed to the committees.

Provost Swan acknowledged that it would have been better if she had announced the vacancies before she established search committees and indicated that she would do this in the future. Provost Swan said that the three search committees had at least two faculty members appointed by the AAUP. She said that one reason the committees had relatively few faculty members on them was that they were not searches for deans of degree-granting colleges.

Provost Swan reported that in each of the recent searches for college deans, the majority of members of committees had been faculty. She said that of the 14 members of the Search Committee for the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, 12 had been faculty members. She noted that this pattern remained consistent for the Dean of the College of the Environment and Life Sciences (13 members 10 of whom were faculty); Dean of the College of Engineering (11 members, 9 faculty); Dean of Pharmacy (10 members, 6 faculty); and Dean of University College (9 members, 5 faculty).

The Provost said that she would be willing to appoint additional faculty members to the Search Committee for a Vice Provost for Academic Affairs. She encouraged the Executive Committee to forward suggestions as soon as possible.

b. Fostering interdisciplinary activities: The Executive Committee told the Provost that they continued to be interested in helping faculty members who wish to participate in interdisciplinary activities, including teaching as well as research. They said that it was important to follow-up on the JSPC discussion. They suggested that the Provost appoint a faculty member who would research what other institutions were doing to promote interdisciplinary activity as well as serving as a troubleshooter to remove obstacles as they develop.

Provost Swan said that the Council of Deans had postponed their retreat to discuss fostering interdisciplinary activities but had identified a number of such efforts that were underway already. She noted the partnerships as a prime example of interdisciplinary efforts. She also referred the Executive Committee to a letter from the President to the Deans urging that they consider more than the traditional measures of faculty when making promotion and tenure decisions.

The Executive Committee indicated that while it might be somewhat easier to do interdisciplinary work within a college, barriers between colleges remained. It was suggested that a focus group of faculty members be formed to gather information concerning the bureaucratic obstacles to interdisciplinary work at URI.

c. Mission Statements: The Executive Committee discussed with the Provost the Board of Governorsπ recent mandate that the three institutions revisit and revise their mission statements. Provost Swan indicated that while the Mission Statement had been reviewed by the JSPC fairly recently, she would ask that it be placed on the Agenda again.

The Executive Committee expressed concern that the Board might be looking for references to assessing student learning outcomes in the statement. Provost Swan said that she would try to discover whether the new NEASC accreditation standards required that student learning outcomes assessment had to be overtly stated in the mission.

d. Tuition remission for high achieving students who transfer from CCRI under the Joint Admissions Agreement: The Executive Committee raised the issue (see discussion of Joint Admissions Agreement above in item 3b) with Provost Swan who indicated that she had seen the proposal from CCRI for the first time at the February 11 meeting of the Board of Governors Academic and Student Affairs Committee. She said that she hadnπt had the opportunity to pursue this matter with President Carothers but intended to discuss with him as soon as possible the concept and financial ramifications for URI of reducing tuition for students who transfer from CCRI with grade point averages above 3.0.

The Provost also said that she and the other academic Vice Presidents had argued from its inception that the Joint Articulation Agreement would require more funding.

When Provost Swan left the meeting, the Executive Committee resumed its regular order of business.

4. b. Committees: The Executive Committee considered potential faculty members for the Faculty Senateπs appointee to Institutional Resources Council (IRC). It was noted that Senator Kowalski had been appointed by Dean Brownell to represent the College of Arts and Sciences on the committee.

As requested, Ms. Grubman provided the Executive Committee with information on the Instructional Space Advisory Group (ISAG). She noted that the committee had been established by Registrar Strobel in the fall of 2000 and, according to her records, had never become an official committee. She said that the committee described in the Faculty Senate Minutes of September 28, 2000, was to comprise fifteen members, two of whom were Faculty Senate appointees. Ms. Grubman said that she hadnπt heard of the committeeπs activities or been asked for representatives of the Faculty Senate since Ms. McMahon left the University but that it appeared to have been active in recent months. She reminded the Executive Committee that ISAG was one of the committees she had mentioned at the beginning of the year that appeared to have overlapping concerns.

In response to a question about the Classroom Management Team (CMT), Ms. Grubman said that it had been appointed a number of years ago by the Provost to handle day-to-day concerns related to classrooms. She said the original committee had comprised Ms. Janie Palm from IITS, Ms. Midge McMahon from Enrollment Services and Mr. Gary Hill from the Physical Plant. She said that the CMT had reported to the Senate during the first two or three years of operation and still maintains a listserv: Classroom-L@PETE.uri.edu.

It was agreed that Senator Kowalski would bring both ISAG and the CMT to the attention of SEDA in an effort to clarify responsibilities for classrooms. This was especially important since the University had conducted a classroom utilization study recently and had hired a University Planner who is knowledgeable in these matters.

Ms. Grubman announced that the Academic Standards and Calendar Committee had forwarded two calendars accompanied by rationale for each and had requested a meeting with the Faculty Senate Executive Committee. Ms. Grubman said that Professor Loy, Chair of the committee would meet with the Executive Committee on March 2 at 1:00 p.m.

c Budget Priorities: Chairperson Boudreaux-Bartels thanked the members of the Executive Committee for sharing their individual ideas about budget priorities by e-mail. She said that she would try to compile the suggestions for further discussion on February 23.

6. The Executive Committee reviewed the Final Draft Agenda for Faculty Senate Meeting #6, February 24, 2005 and approved it in final form.

7. The Executive Committee reviewed materials on the history of ROTC at the University of Rhode Island, which had been provided by Vice Chairperson Rosen with assistance from Senator Rice and Ms. Grubman. It was agreed to put the material on the Faculty Senateπs website and to notify subscribers to FacSen-Bus that it is available. (See http://www.uri.edu/facsen/ROTC_History_at_URI.html.)

The meeting was adjourned at 3:00 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Sheila Black Grubman