Dean Skerrett called the meeting to order at 10:30 a.m. The minutes of the February 5, 2013 meeting were approved.
All proposals on the February 19, 2013 consent agenda were approved.
•A&S compliance training with Joan Neff and Shannon Sinclair
The dean welcomed Associate Provost Joan Neff and University Counsel Shannon Sinclair to Academic Council. Joan explained that all faculty and staff members at the University must complete compliance training. The presentation began with situational questions. Members answered how they would respond to the hypothetical situations. Shannon defined compliance and explained why the program is in place at the University. The program is designed to promote a culture of integrity and compliance with regulations. The program will also reinforce the University's commitment to excellence. The key elements of the University's program are board level oversight, code of organization ethics and integrity, clear delegation of compliance responsibilities, confidential reporting mechanism, compliance education, monitoring and auditing, appropriate corrective action, and annual review of the effectiveness of the compliance program.
Shannon discussed the methods of reporting a compliance issue on campus. In addition to reporting issues to a department chair, dean, or a member of the administration, a person may report concerns through the Ethics and Compliance Helpline. This helpline is completely anonymous. Please visit the University's compliance webpage with any questions about the compliance program.
•Teaching innovation and classroom master plan
The dean invited Kevin Creamer to discuss the classroom master plan sessions. The University is looking ahead to the next 10 years as programs have changed since the first plan was launched in 2005. The university has contracted consultants to do an analysis of formal and informal teaching spaces and to generate ideas for aligning them with our pedagogies and programs. The first round of meetings with the consultants took place in early February. The second round of meetings will take place the last week of February. A few sessions will be open to faculty. You can find more information here.
•Proposed changes to faculty handbook/faculty practices/directors
Following last year's listening series, the Dean asked the Directors to organize themselves and to advance an agenda of issues for the dean. Joe Essid presented the agenda to Academic Council. The dean and the Directors have worked through some issues. The Directors have proposed some revisions to the faculty handbook that include eligibility for voting in departments, access to professional development resources, and a paid professional leave each ten years of continuous service. After some discussion, many council members expressed concern regarding departmental voting, professional leaves, and position-based eligibility for resources. Hugh West suggested that the issue of Directors' faculty rights be studied by a disinterested faculty committee appointed by regular means or the faculty status subcommittee of the University Faculty Council. It was suggested by the dean that Directors consider these reservations, and begin to prepare a revised proposal for discussion and deliberation in a faculty governance process.
•Distribution of Adjunct and term appointments
The dean asked Academic Council to look over a chart that shows the demographics for the School of Arts and Sciences, including the percentage of full-time faculty (by headcount) who are not in tenure-line positions. It was suggested that it would be helpful to see the breakdown of how many adjuncts and term appointments teach general education classes. Dean Skerrett is concerned that the proportion of non-tenure-line faculty is increasing relative to tenure-line faculty. While this is a national trend, she is concerned that we contributing to this situation without making an intentional plan to do so. She would like to continue this discussion at the next meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:55am
Respectfully submitted,
Zandria Haines
All proposals on the February 19, 2013 consent agenda were approved.
•A&S compliance training with Joan Neff and Shannon Sinclair
The dean welcomed Associate Provost Joan Neff and University Counsel Shannon Sinclair to Academic Council. Joan explained that all faculty and staff members at the University must complete compliance training. The presentation began with situational questions. Members answered how they would respond to the hypothetical situations. Shannon defined compliance and explained why the program is in place at the University. The program is designed to promote a culture of integrity and compliance with regulations. The program will also reinforce the University's commitment to excellence. The key elements of the University's program are board level oversight, code of organization ethics and integrity, clear delegation of compliance responsibilities, confidential reporting mechanism, compliance education, monitoring and auditing, appropriate corrective action, and annual review of the effectiveness of the compliance program.
Shannon discussed the methods of reporting a compliance issue on campus. In addition to reporting issues to a department chair, dean, or a member of the administration, a person may report concerns through the Ethics and Compliance Helpline. This helpline is completely anonymous. Please visit the University's compliance webpage with any questions about the compliance program.
•Teaching innovation and classroom master plan
The dean invited Kevin Creamer to discuss the classroom master plan sessions. The University is looking ahead to the next 10 years as programs have changed since the first plan was launched in 2005. The university has contracted consultants to do an analysis of formal and informal teaching spaces and to generate ideas for aligning them with our pedagogies and programs. The first round of meetings with the consultants took place in early February. The second round of meetings will take place the last week of February. A few sessions will be open to faculty. You can find more information here.
•Proposed changes to faculty handbook/faculty practices/directors
Following last year's listening series, the Dean asked the Directors to organize themselves and to advance an agenda of issues for the dean. Joe Essid presented the agenda to Academic Council. The dean and the Directors have worked through some issues. The Directors have proposed some revisions to the faculty handbook that include eligibility for voting in departments, access to professional development resources, and a paid professional leave each ten years of continuous service. After some discussion, many council members expressed concern regarding departmental voting, professional leaves, and position-based eligibility for resources. Hugh West suggested that the issue of Directors' faculty rights be studied by a disinterested faculty committee appointed by regular means or the faculty status subcommittee of the University Faculty Council. It was suggested by the dean that Directors consider these reservations, and begin to prepare a revised proposal for discussion and deliberation in a faculty governance process.
•Distribution of Adjunct and term appointments
The dean asked Academic Council to look over a chart that shows the demographics for the School of Arts and Sciences, including the percentage of full-time faculty (by headcount) who are not in tenure-line positions. It was suggested that it would be helpful to see the breakdown of how many adjuncts and term appointments teach general education classes. Dean Skerrett is concerned that the proportion of non-tenure-line faculty is increasing relative to tenure-line faculty. While this is a national trend, she is concerned that we contributing to this situation without making an intentional plan to do so. She would like to continue this discussion at the next meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:55am
Respectfully submitted,
Zandria Haines
No comments:
Post a Comment