Dean Andy Newcomb called the meeting to order at 4:01 p.m. in the Brown-Alley Room of Weinstein Hall.
The Dean announced that the approved FY12 budget maintains current support for existing programs, such as post docs and summer fellowships for students and faculty. It reallocates $425, 000 to allow for merit-based equity adjustments by eliminating five dormant faculty lines and shifting equipment costs to the Plant and Kresge funds. The model for allocation of FY12 equity-based adjustments reviewed by the Dean’s Advisory Council, Academic Council and the faculty as a whole is based on a study of faculty salaries that showed the greatest need in the assistant, faculty of practice and full professor ranks. About half of the A&S faculty will receive equity merit bumps. The eventual target for salaries in each rank remains to be determined.
The dean led a discussion of recommended changes to A&S tenure and promotion guidelines in the Faculty Handbook (see attached). Although the logical necessity of the recommendation on page one concerning the compensation of an exceptional record in one area for a weaker record of achievement in another area might be questioned, its addition might help clarify the previous sentence, which could be understood to mean an overall level of excellence but not necessarily one in each of the three areas of teaching, scholarship and service. The recommendations on page two concerning the dean’s consultation with T&P and on page six concerning keeping the actual vote of the department or of T&P from the candidate reflect existing practice. Discussion on the recommendations concerning the addition of new materials to the candidate’s portfolio both questioned the necessity of deleting the sentence on page five and the necessity for the department and T&P to evaluate the same material. Some wondered why the recommendation on page eight concerning a different assessment of a candidate’s portfolio than that of T&P by the president and/or provost should not also apply to differences between the department and T&P.
Hugh West (History) moved that changes to tenure and promotion criteria be referred to the former Ad Hoc A&S Tenure and Promotion Committee for review or revision (see attached). The motion was defeated.
The dean requested that the current T&P Committee meet to consider today’s discussion and recommended that it consult with the Provost about any changes.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Gene Anderson, Secretary
- The minutes of the December 7, 2010 meeting were approved as circulated.
- The actions of A&S Academic Council were approved as circulated
The Dean announced that the approved FY12 budget maintains current support for existing programs, such as post docs and summer fellowships for students and faculty. It reallocates $425, 000 to allow for merit-based equity adjustments by eliminating five dormant faculty lines and shifting equipment costs to the Plant and Kresge funds. The model for allocation of FY12 equity-based adjustments reviewed by the Dean’s Advisory Council, Academic Council and the faculty as a whole is based on a study of faculty salaries that showed the greatest need in the assistant, faculty of practice and full professor ranks. About half of the A&S faculty will receive equity merit bumps. The eventual target for salaries in each rank remains to be determined.
The dean led a discussion of recommended changes to A&S tenure and promotion guidelines in the Faculty Handbook (see attached). Although the logical necessity of the recommendation on page one concerning the compensation of an exceptional record in one area for a weaker record of achievement in another area might be questioned, its addition might help clarify the previous sentence, which could be understood to mean an overall level of excellence but not necessarily one in each of the three areas of teaching, scholarship and service. The recommendations on page two concerning the dean’s consultation with T&P and on page six concerning keeping the actual vote of the department or of T&P from the candidate reflect existing practice. Discussion on the recommendations concerning the addition of new materials to the candidate’s portfolio both questioned the necessity of deleting the sentence on page five and the necessity for the department and T&P to evaluate the same material. Some wondered why the recommendation on page eight concerning a different assessment of a candidate’s portfolio than that of T&P by the president and/or provost should not also apply to differences between the department and T&P.
Hugh West (History) moved that changes to tenure and promotion criteria be referred to the former Ad Hoc A&S Tenure and Promotion Committee for review or revision (see attached). The motion was defeated.
The dean requested that the current T&P Committee meet to consider today’s discussion and recommended that it consult with the Provost about any changes.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Gene Anderson, Secretary
No comments:
Post a Comment