Dean Skerrett called the meeting to order at 10:32 a.m. The minutes of the March 5, 2013 meeting were approved.
All proposals on the March 19, 2013 consent agenda were approved.
-Report on annual performance reviews:
The dean presented a report on the annual performance review process that we have just completed. The period under review was the academic year 2011-2012. The dean’s proposal for salary enhancements has been submitted to the provost and will be presented to the Board of Trustees at their April meeting. Due to the approved revision in the faculty handbook, the salary letters will be sent out no later than three weeks after the Board of Trustees’ meeting.
Dean Skerrett gave an overview of the annual review process. After the department chairs submitted the dossier, two associate deans independently reviewed each dossier and then discussed each case to arrive at a merit score. The dean reviewed all annual reports and arrived at a merit score. Finally, merit scores from the chairs, associate deans, and the dean were compared in cases of discrepancy. The dean is responsible for the final score.
Kathleen thanked Patty Murphy, director of institutional effectiveness, for building a merit model for A&S. The dean discussed tenure and promotion “bumps” and explained that it is her intention to keep this policy in future. The dean showed the distribution of merit categories across the faculty, and discussed the elements of the algorithm for distributing merit pay across ranks and merit categories. Finally the dean reported on the percentage of cases where there was discrepancy between the department chairs’ evaluation and the dean’s.
The triennial schedule for departments will be updated and sent to department chairs. The dean reminded council members that all faculty members must submit an annual review each June.
There was discussion regarding how merit score revisions will effect tenure decisions since a letter from the dean noting the revision may be included in the candidate’s dossier. The dean will bring examples of the dean’s letter to the next Academic Council meeting.
-Honors theses and faculty time: Suzanne Jones
Professor Jones opened discussion on honors seminars and how departments manage honor students. In the past, there was a banking procedure in place after a faculty member directed a high number of theses. Since directing honors seminars requires a lot of work, there is concern that people are now reluctant to take on a student that would like to do an independent study. Many gave examples of how they handle such situations in their department. The dean affirmed that independent studies and honors theses must be accommodated within existing faculty resources and time.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:51am
Respectfully submitted,
Zandria Haines
All proposals on the March 19, 2013 consent agenda were approved.
-Report on annual performance reviews:
The dean presented a report on the annual performance review process that we have just completed. The period under review was the academic year 2011-2012. The dean’s proposal for salary enhancements has been submitted to the provost and will be presented to the Board of Trustees at their April meeting. Due to the approved revision in the faculty handbook, the salary letters will be sent out no later than three weeks after the Board of Trustees’ meeting.
Dean Skerrett gave an overview of the annual review process. After the department chairs submitted the dossier, two associate deans independently reviewed each dossier and then discussed each case to arrive at a merit score. The dean reviewed all annual reports and arrived at a merit score. Finally, merit scores from the chairs, associate deans, and the dean were compared in cases of discrepancy. The dean is responsible for the final score.
Kathleen thanked Patty Murphy, director of institutional effectiveness, for building a merit model for A&S. The dean discussed tenure and promotion “bumps” and explained that it is her intention to keep this policy in future. The dean showed the distribution of merit categories across the faculty, and discussed the elements of the algorithm for distributing merit pay across ranks and merit categories. Finally the dean reported on the percentage of cases where there was discrepancy between the department chairs’ evaluation and the dean’s.
The triennial schedule for departments will be updated and sent to department chairs. The dean reminded council members that all faculty members must submit an annual review each June.
There was discussion regarding how merit score revisions will effect tenure decisions since a letter from the dean noting the revision may be included in the candidate’s dossier. The dean will bring examples of the dean’s letter to the next Academic Council meeting.
-Honors theses and faculty time: Suzanne Jones
Professor Jones opened discussion on honors seminars and how departments manage honor students. In the past, there was a banking procedure in place after a faculty member directed a high number of theses. Since directing honors seminars requires a lot of work, there is concern that people are now reluctant to take on a student that would like to do an independent study. Many gave examples of how they handle such situations in their department. The dean affirmed that independent studies and honors theses must be accommodated within existing faculty resources and time.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:51am
Respectfully submitted,
Zandria Haines
No comments:
Post a Comment