Dean Skerrett called the meeting to order at 10:31 a.m. The minutes of the December 6, 2011 meeting will be approved at the next meeting due to typographical error.
All proposals on the January 17, 2012 consent agenda were approved by unanimous consent.
Discussion Agenda
1. Associate Deans
Dean Skerrett distributed the portfolio of responsibilities for the new associate deans. The associate deans were asked to describe their responsibilities. Lisa Gentile began by explaining her focus on the arts initiative. This initiative will look at facilities, equipment, and infrastructure, and will take inventory of what is needed to move forward. Another aspect of the arts initiative will be designing a vision for the arts at University of Richmond. Lisa will also work on new chair training and a capacity audit. Malcolm Hill will be in charge of new faculty orientation and during the course of the semester Malcolm will be in touch with chairs for ideas. Malcolm will also focus on the annual merit review process, and will serve as the liaison to admissions. Vincent Wang will spend his spring semester supporting undergraduate and faculty research. Vincent will also be in charge of developing processes for program based budgeting and coordinating plans for the Richmond summer experience initiative. Kathy Hoke and Scott Johnson will continue to train the new deans to work in their areas, and will return to their departments in mid May. A question was raised about faculty searches and how they would be coordinated in the future. The dean mentioned that she would like to finish one complete cycle of searches before making a decision. Dean Skerrett also discussed having a more consistent process for term faculty requests.
2. Scheduling- Scott Johnson
Scott opened discussion by introducing Susan Breeden and Leah Nelson. Since there had been recent questions around the 10% rule for fall classes, Scott asked Susan to elaborate on this subject. Susan informed Council that the University could only accommodate 10% of students in classrooms based on the total number of classes. There are a limited number of classrooms so if every department were to go over the number of classes for each time period, the registrar would be unable to accommodate those classes. Susan suggested that if a department has more than one section of a required course, to place one in the morning and one in the afternoon; if you anticipate a soft enrollment, aim for a primetime spot. There was a suggestion to move some required courses to Fridays. Scott asked chairs to email him and Libby Gruner with a plan for fall and spring first year seminars. Scott informed Council that for any classes to be listed in the catalog for Fall 2012, details should be emailed to Scott no later than February 13th. Some members asked about scheduling classes electronically. After some discussion, Scott told Council he would speak with web services and discuss with chairs the positive and negatives of electronic scheduling.
3. Mid-course Reviews and Revised Memorandum of Instruction
Dean Skerrett thanked Malcolm Hill and the Tenure & Promotion committee for drafting and revising the Memorandum of Instruction concerning mid course reviews. The approved memorandum was sent to chairs and faculty members scheduled for review.
4. Introduction to Science II Initiative
Malcolm Hill will be spearheading the Science II initiative this semester. Malcolm will speak with department chairs to discuss issues associated with equipment inventory, technology needs associated with science, and a historical record of Science Initiative I. Dean Skerrett’s goal is to have a shared plan for equipment procurement and replacement, so that departments make collaborative strategic decisions about these needs.
5. Subject Rule Review:
Suzanne Jones opened by discussing her research on other national liberal arts colleges’ subject rules. Suzanne mentioned that since her time as chair of the English department, there have been cases where a student has been unable to take a course because of the 17.5 unit subject rule. The question was raised if the subject rule was needed. If the School of Arts and Sciences proposed a change to the subject rule, then the other four schools at the University would have to approve this change too. It was suggested that the departments look at how many students the subject rule effects before changing the rule. Some members stated they would rather create a waiver process rather than drop the subject rule for a few students. It was suggested that students request a waiver through the Arts and Sciences petition committee. Dean Skerrett will continue this conversation with Suzanne Jones.
The meeting adjourned at 11:45 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Zandria Ivy
