1. The meeting was called to order at 10:10 a.m. on Wednesday, December 5, 2012 in the Dorothy Vocino Conference Room in the URI Library, Chairperson Larsen presiding. All members were present except Senator Barbour.
2. The Executive Committee reviewed the Minutes from their last two meetings. The Minutes of Executive Committee Meeting #17, November 28, 2012 were approved as corrected. The Minutes of Meeting #18 with Provost DeHayes on November 29, 2012, were approved pending review by the Provost.
3. The Executive Committee discussed the Agenda for Faculty Senate Meeting #4, December 13, 2012. Chairperson Larsen announced that Dean Zawia had graciously agreed to sponsor the reception after the meeting.
The Executive Committee discussed their report on facilities and administration (overhead) funds. Ms. Grubman was asked to forward the FSEC's proposed University Manual sections 10.70.10-14 to Professor Ordoñez and to invite her and other interested members of the Council for Research to attend the meeting.
The Executive Committee also agreed that if questions were raised requiring answers by the President or Provost, they would move to postpone further consideration until January.
Ms. Grubman explained that the 501st Report of the CAC contained a revision to the committee's proposed section 8.81.62. She noted that the CAC stated in the report that if Senate subsequently approved a separate procedure for graduate courses, 400-level courses should be considered undergraduate courses. The approval process for 400-level courses was discussed and the FSEC agreed that it might be appropriate to review the approval process for 400-level courses at this time.
Following discussion, the Agenda was approved in final form.
a. The Executive Committee discussed their November 29 meeting with Provost DeHayes (See Minutes of FSEC MEETING #18) and their lunch meeting with the AAUP Executive Committee on November 30. Ms. Grubman reported that the AAUP had some concerns about the proposed revisions to section 7.22.10 and both groups had agreed to ask the CBUM Committee to review the issue and make recommendations.
b. Senator Nassersharif reported on the December 4 meeting with Provost DeHayes and Deans Higgins, Kirby and Maslyn about the administrator evaluation process. He said that there was some concern by the deans that they be given an opportunity to review the committee's draft before it was given to the Provost. The Executive Committee agreed that it should be possible.
Senator Nassersharif said that there was some discussion about whether to use the same form for each evaluation and noted that the Provost preferred that the same survey be used by everyone including the people he wished to survey about the Deans.
The Executive Committee thought that each of the evaluation committees should develop their own questions using the available surveys. Another option would be to suggest that each committee select specific questions of their own for part B while using some of the same survey questions in part A. Senator Nassersharif announced that they would be meeting with the Provost and Vice Provost McCray on December 10.
c. Chairperson Larsen thanked Senator Davis for her draft letter to academic department chairs requesting information on grants, primarily in the arts and humanities that were not accompanied by overhead. She said that she has written the draft by the Council for Research as a follow-up on the discussion that these grants were not mentioned in URI's research reports.
d. Vice Chairperson Byrd shared a draft written by Dean Kirby for the members of the Administration and Management Review Committee in response to the Provost's request that the group consider ways to coordinate health and wellness programs. He said that the group of faculty members and deans had not had the opportunity to discuss the draft.
The Executive Committee agreed that they should set up a meeting as soon as possible to discuss faculty governance and process issues related to his request to the Administration and Management Review Committee.
It was further noted that most members of the Executive Committee believed that the when the committee was announced by President Dooley, they would be asked to look at inefficiencies in administrative functions such as paperwork, purchasing, delays in decision-making, hiring difficulties, support for PI's once grants are obtained, etc.
The meeting was adjourned at 12:20 P.M.
Sheila Black Grubman
EVALUATION REPORT PROVOST DEHAYES posted 9/18/14
OPEN ACCESS POLICY (5/24/13)