Skip to main content
Scenes from Faculty Senate

Faculty Senate Executive Committee Meeting

Minutes #16

November 21, 2012

1. The meeting was called to order at 10:02 a.m. on Wednesday, November 21, 2012 in the Dorothy Vocino Conference Room in the URI Library, Chairperson Larsen presiding. All members were present except Vice Chairperson Byrd. Senator Davis participated by telephone. Chairperson Larsen said that Vice Chairperson Byrd sent his regrets and explained that he only discovered at the last minute that he would not be able to attend the meeting.

2. The Minutes of Executive Committee Meeting #15, November 14, 2012 were approved.

3. The Executive Committee discussed the November 15 Faculty Senate meeting. The following matters were considered:

a. The apparent conflict between NEASC public disclosure requirements and the wishes of the Graduate Council. Ms. Grubman reported that the CAC had met the previous afternoon and had agreed to clarify the language of 8.81.62 to ensure that Enrollment Services' role was limited to maintaining records of courses that were not offered. She also noted that the CAC had asked that she convey their opinion that 400-level courses for graduate credit were undergraduate courses and that a different timeline should not be specified for 400-level courses which might be taken for graduate credit. She said that the CAC preferred that a single standard apply to both graduate and undergraduate courses but did not want to make a specific recommendation to the Senate

Senator Barbour reported that she had spoken with an assistant director at NEASC who had confirmed that their standard was intended to provide correct information to potential students and parents and was envisioned to include all courses. She noted that some suggested language might be acceptable with regard to courses but that separate listing of those courses would be required. Discussion ensued with regard to difficulties the policy may cause graduate programs with regard to offering more advanced courses as frequently as departments may wish. Senator Barbour will follow-up with an e-mail to Dean Zawia regarding the correspondence.

Although no consensus could be reached about whether separate timelines were appropriate for graduate courses, the FSEC voted to inform the Graduate Council that 400-level courses offered for graduate credit should not be treated differently from other undergraduate courses. It was agreed to inform the Graduate Council about their position on 400-level courses.

b. The Executive Committee discussed the Graduate Council's recommendation about graduate faculty status and agreed it might be appropriate for Chairperson Larsen, Fritz Wenisch, Chair of the CBUM Committee, and Ms. Grubman to meet with the Graduate School to discuss the intent of the Graduate Council's proposal, including what specific problems it was meant to address, and offer to help craft clearer language if possible.

c. Chairperson Larsen asked members of the FSEC to review the recommendations of the ad hoc committee on advising to determine how some might be implemented and whether some should be developed further. They also agreed that establishing at least one continuing committee on advising would be appropriate.

The Executive Committee decided to schedule a meeting with Dean Richmond and Professor Honhart once the FSEC agreed on appropriate actions.

4. Announcements/Correspondence

a. Senator Rice announced that he had drafted a proposal to include service in the University Manual section on criteria for tenure and promotion. The FSEC reviewed the draft and agreed to forward it to the CBUM Committee and the AAUP and to ask for comments or suggestions before bringing it to the Faculty Senate.

b. Ms. Grubman asked which members of the FSEC planned to attend the lunch meeting with the AAUP Executive Committee on November 30. Chairperson Larsen, Senator Davis, Senator Nassersharif and Ms. Grubman indicated that they would attend. Chairperson Larsen indicated that he believed Vice Chairperson Byrd planned to attend as well.

c. Chairperson Larsen said that Ms. Finan in SLOAA had contacted him about the Senate's having a role with regard to an upcoming visit from a representative from the Wabash Study. The FSEC agreed to discuss this matter at a subsequent meeting.

d. Ms. Grubman confirmed with the FSEC that their regular day and time for Executive Committee meetings in the spring semester would be on Mondays from 10-12. The FSEC agreed that they should schedule a meeting for sometime before January 18 to plan for the January 24, 2013 Faculty Senate Meeting.

e. The Executive Committee discussed some of the Provost's suggestions with regard to the University Manual sections on the process for reviewing the distribution of Facilities and Administration (Overhead Funds. The FSEC was unanimous in support of a faculty chair of the proposed Council for Research subcommittee that would conduct the review.

5. The Executive Committee agreed to the following topics for their November 29 meeting with Provost DeHayes:

a. Manual Sections on the proposed process for distribution of Facilities and Administration (Overhead) Funds;
b. Possible reorganization of health programs.

It was noted that the Provost would probably add more topics for discussion.


6. Senator Nassersharif said that he would like to begin the Administrator Evaluation process for Deans Higgins, Kirby, and Maslyn and Vice Provost McCray as soon as possible. He asked the FSEC if his plans for the following process were acceptable:

a. Meet with the Dean to be reviewed to inform them that they will be reviewed and go over the process with them.
b. Have them prepare a statement of accomplishments to be distributed to their constituency.
c. Send a notice to their constituency to ask for nominations to serve on the committee.
d. Ask the Dean for the name of a representative.
e. Ask the provost for the name of a representative.
f. Select committees in consultation with the FSEC, the Dean, and the Provost.
g. Schedule the first meeting of the committee to go over the process and confidentiality.
h. Work with the committee to design the appropriate survey for each dean.
i. Administer the survey and deliver the results to the committee.
j. Have the committee produce a report on their findings.
k. Have the committee schedule a meeting with the Dean to review the results for fact check.
l. Have the committee meet with the Provost to go over the results.
m. Have the Provost meet with the faculty of the college to go over the results excluding confidential information.
n. Conclude the process.

It was agreed that it should move forward as soon as possible.

The meeting was adjourned at 12:00 noon.


Respectfully submitted,

Sheila Black Grubman

 

NEWS FROM FACULTY SENATE

EVALUATION REPORT PROVOST DEHAYES posted 9/18/14

 

Michael W. Honhart, Professor of History 2014 Recipient of the Sheila Black Grubman Faculty Outstanding Service Award

URI ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW

OPEN ACCESS POLICY (5/24/13)

University Libraries LibGuides

QUICK LINKS