Skip to main content
Scenes from Faculty Senate

Faculty Senate Executive Committee Meeting

Minutes   #25

April 14, 2009

The meeting was called to order at 3: 05 p.m. on Tuesday, April 14, 2009 in the President's Conference Room in Green Hall, Chairperson Martin presiding. All members were present.

2. Ms. Grubman said she had not been able to write any minutes since the previous FSEC meeting.

3. The Executive Committee reviewed a draft Agenda for the April 23 meeting of the Faculty Senate

4. The Executive Committee was brought up-to-date on the following matters of continuing concern:

a. The Presidential Search: Chairperson Martin reminded everyone that the first candidate, Dr. Sona Andrews was scheduled to meet with the FSEC on Thursday, April 16 at 8:30 a.m. in the Alumni Center.

The Executive Committee began to develop a series of questions. Chairperson Martin volunteered to prepare a list based on the discussion and send it to the FSEC before Thursday morning.

b. Following up on Ad Hoc Committees: Senator Swallow reported that the Ad Hoc Committee on the Site of the Research Park was proceeding as carefully and as expeditiously as possible. He announced that that the Student Senate planned to consider the issue of the site of the Research Park issue at their next meeting.

c. Celebration for President Carothers: Ms Grubman reported that she had sent an e-mail message to all Senators inviting them to participate in the procession from the Multicultural Center to the University Library on May 1.

d. Faculty Forum on Learning and Discovery: Chairperson Martin reminded everyone that the Forum was scheduled for the upcoming Thursday, April 16 and asked members of the FSEC to encourage their colleagues to attend.

5. The Executive Committee met with Provost DeHayes from 4:00-5:00 p.m. The following topics were considered:

a. Provost DeHayes and the Executive Committee discussed the areas identified by the faculty at the Academic Summit in January and those raised by the students at the recent Student Summit. Provost DeHayes noted that the issues raised at the summits did not lend themselves to specific and discrete topics for task forces, but overlapped in many ways. He said that a combination of standing committees and ad hoc groups might be the way to proceed.

The Provost shared with the Executive Committee his draft list of goals from which to proceed, along with suggestions for implementation. However, it was noted that these goals are a work in progress and they will likely be modified over time. Following are the goals that were identified:

  1. Implement a contemporary model of active and collaborative learning and achievement that prepares students for the rapidly changing world of the 21st century.
  2. Ensure students and faculty are equipped with knowledge and experiences to function as responsible and inquisitive global citizens.
  3. Improve institutional effectiveness, accountability and performance to promote academic programs and initiatives.
  4. Create a campus climate that celebrates difference and creates a rich learning environment built upon inclusion.
  5. Develop a crosscutting model of sustainability and stewardship in relation to campus operations, student and faculty learning and behavior, and innovative processes that contribute to the expansion of Rhode Island's "green."
  6. Promote new interdisciplinary endeavors in faculty and student research, scholarship and creative work that address major societal challenges and opportunities, add value to human experience, and expand new innovation-based knowledge economy.

b. Provost De Hayes reported on his selection of Professor Nasser Zawia as Interim Dean of the Graduate School. He said he expected that with the help of a new perspective, the administration would be able decide how best to move forward in Graduate Education. The Provost expressed a hope to search for a Dean in about a year, once specific goals were identified.

c. The Executive Committee asked Provost DeHayes to elaborate on the process for reviewing programs with a small number of graduates. He said that the reviews has been triggered by the Board of Governors, but that we worked to streamline the process and emphasizing enhancing quality and positioning programs and the university for the future in a changing world. OHE has been open and supportive of different process and format and the expanded goals of the review. The list of programs identified by the Board is readily available. The Provost suggested that one of the goals of the review was to see what might be done by consolidating some programs and/or modifying the direction of the programs in question that might lead to more positive results.

The meeting was adjourned at 5:00 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Sheila Black Grumban