Dean Kathleen Skerrett called the meeting to order at 4:04 p.m. in the Brown-Alley Room of Weinstein Hall. Bill Myers moved approval of the minutes of the Arts and Sciences faculty meeting from November 7, 2013. Dan Palazzolo seconded the motion and the faculty voted to approve. Reed West moved approval of Academic Council Actions from November 5. Tze Loo seconded the motion and the faculty voted to approve.
Career Services: Arts & Sciences Blueprint
Dean Skerrett introduced Diana Burkett, Communications Manager in the Office of Career Services. Diana provided a presentation and demonstration of the School of Arts and Sciences Blueprint as a starting-point for linking students’ academic experiences with their career goals and paths. She explained that a Blueprint has been created for each school at the university in order to meet different needs of the students and the respective disciplines. The BluePrint has two goals: 1) outlining the core competencies for Arts and Sciences students 2) assisting students with how to discuss these competencies as they prepare for future positions. Competency examples include problem solving, team building, and knowledge of the world. Career Services seeks faculty input with defining the competencies and illustrating how they are acquired in various disciplines and academic experiences. Please send your ideas to Diana Burkett at: dburkett@richmond.edu or call her at 289-8547.
The website address for the blueprint is: http://careerservices.richmond.edu/exploration/AS-blueprint/
Dean Skerrett also noted that the Office of Communications seeks input from each department in order to build department versions of competencies, in addition to the overall A&S competencies. Faculty can then explain to students on how they can acquire those capabilities within their programs.
Report from A & S Nominating Committee: Election Results
Dan Palazzolo, Chair of the A&S Nominating Committee shared the results of the Planning and Priorities election. The Nominating Committee is committed to educating faculty on the committee’s activities, how elections work, sharing election results, etc. A&S faculty members elect one member from each of the quadripartite divisions to represent them on the Dean’s Advisory Council. These four members also represent the A&S quadripartite divisions on the Planning and Priorities Committee. Dan reminded faculty that the Planning and Priorities election is unusual because it occurs in the fall, in order to schedule new members for the Dean’s Advisory Council meetings for the next year. Committee members represent the quadripartite divisions within the Dean’s Advisory Council. Current membership includes Jan French (Division I); Kathy Hoke (Division II); Carol Summers (Division III) and Walt Stevenson (Division IV).
Sydney Watts (former chair of the Nominating Committee) commented that it is important to inform faculty about the level of participation in elections as well as to publicly validate the election results. Nicole Sackley asked if it would be better to share percentages, rather than numbers, in election results, to avoid any embarrassment. Dan also indicated that he will pull together chairs and review their responsibilities and then update the website.
Shared Governance Initiatives:
A. University Faculty Senate Initiative
Dean Skerrett addressed two faculty governance initiatives that will advance to the faculty this spring. They include a Faculty Senate proposal from the University Faculty Council and suggested by-laws for the A&S Dean’s Advisory Council. The Dean stated that these two initiatives emerged independently but that A & S faculty should be involved in discussing each of them. The dean introduced Jan French and Jennifer Erkulwater (both representing University Faculty Council) to speak about the Faculty Senate proposal that is being prepared for discussion. Planning for a Senate proposal started in the spring of 2013, with a study of faculty governance at peer institutions. A draft proposal should be ready for review and discussion at a February faculty meeting. In addition, faculty may read about the Council’s work via minutes on the UFC Blackboard website. The proposal has important implications for A&S, as the largest school within the university. The Dean urges A&S faculty to pay attention to the proposal, read it carefully and offer good discussion and support. Faculty members need to be involved in this initiative. The goal is develop a proposal that can gain the support of the faculty, the administration and the Board of Trustees. There will be many questions to discuss, including the character of representation, but the UFC is hoping to move forward with the proposal through active deliberations.
B. By-laws for the Dean’s Advisory Council
Dean Skerrett then discussed the draft of the Provisions for the Operations of the Dean’s Advisory Council. The Dean reminded everyone of the mandate and membership of the advisory council. The current document represents bylaws for the group and reflects how process has developed over the past two years. All of the operations described are currently practiced except for the election of a Chair of DAC. The draft reflects the original mandate, describes the election process, the creation of meetings and the election of the chair.
The dean envisions the Chair of the DAC functioning in similar fashion to the Chair of Tenure & Promotion committee. She noted that the last two provisions concerning avoidance of impropriety and confidentiality are very important to a culture of shared governance.
Nicole Sackley asked about the role of the chair and does the chair become a liaison to the faculty? Would faculty members bring other issues to the chair, not just budget concerns? Dean Skerrett said that has not been proposed and noted that it would be a big change. Nicole suggested that it is important to make the role clear to faculty. The Dean noted that the chair would play a strong role in the Dean’s Advisory Council, but the position would not serve as a chair of the faculty.
Sydney Watts asked about the secret ballot process in Dean’s Advisory Council. Dean Skerrett explained the Dean does not have a vote, just the council members.
Advisory Council members who are elected to represent department chairs would step down if they no longer serve as department chairs. Michelle Hamm commented that if they continued it would be against the spirit of the Council development. She stated that within the Council you are representing your tripartite divisions, but you are also representing what is best for the school.
It was noted that the Planning and Priorities representatives do not report back to the Dean’s Advisory Council.
A question was raised regarding what recourse do department members on the Council have regarding a departmental proposal? Dean Skerrett stated that the Council can invite department chairs or program coordinators to offer further information or clarification. Ultimately, the Dean has to make a decision based on recommendations and limited resources. Bill Myers recommended the inclusion of a paragraph that would further describe the expected scope and perspective of the Council Members.
Dan Palalazzo argued that representatives on the Council can speak for their tripartite division by offering shared perspective rather than advocacy. Those present agreed that sharing a perspective is most important. The ultimate goal is to serve the School of Arts & Sciences as a whole.
Dean Skerrett expressed the desire to approve the Advisory Council by-laws by the end of the semester, but if this does not occur, the conversation can continue next fall. However, this is an opportune time to move forward. The Dean thanked the faculty for their attendance and the meeting adjourned at 5:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lucretia McCulley
Career Services: Arts & Sciences Blueprint
Dean Skerrett introduced Diana Burkett, Communications Manager in the Office of Career Services. Diana provided a presentation and demonstration of the School of Arts and Sciences Blueprint as a starting-point for linking students’ academic experiences with their career goals and paths. She explained that a Blueprint has been created for each school at the university in order to meet different needs of the students and the respective disciplines. The BluePrint has two goals: 1) outlining the core competencies for Arts and Sciences students 2) assisting students with how to discuss these competencies as they prepare for future positions. Competency examples include problem solving, team building, and knowledge of the world. Career Services seeks faculty input with defining the competencies and illustrating how they are acquired in various disciplines and academic experiences. Please send your ideas to Diana Burkett at: dburkett@richmond.edu or call her at 289-8547.
The website address for the blueprint is: http://careerservices.richmond.edu/exploration/AS-blueprint/
Dean Skerrett also noted that the Office of Communications seeks input from each department in order to build department versions of competencies, in addition to the overall A&S competencies. Faculty can then explain to students on how they can acquire those capabilities within their programs.
Report from A & S Nominating Committee: Election Results
Dan Palazzolo, Chair of the A&S Nominating Committee shared the results of the Planning and Priorities election. The Nominating Committee is committed to educating faculty on the committee’s activities, how elections work, sharing election results, etc. A&S faculty members elect one member from each of the quadripartite divisions to represent them on the Dean’s Advisory Council. These four members also represent the A&S quadripartite divisions on the Planning and Priorities Committee. Dan reminded faculty that the Planning and Priorities election is unusual because it occurs in the fall, in order to schedule new members for the Dean’s Advisory Council meetings for the next year. Committee members represent the quadripartite divisions within the Dean’s Advisory Council. Current membership includes Jan French (Division I); Kathy Hoke (Division II); Carol Summers (Division III) and Walt Stevenson (Division IV).
Sydney Watts (former chair of the Nominating Committee) commented that it is important to inform faculty about the level of participation in elections as well as to publicly validate the election results. Nicole Sackley asked if it would be better to share percentages, rather than numbers, in election results, to avoid any embarrassment. Dan also indicated that he will pull together chairs and review their responsibilities and then update the website.
Shared Governance Initiatives:
A. University Faculty Senate Initiative
Dean Skerrett addressed two faculty governance initiatives that will advance to the faculty this spring. They include a Faculty Senate proposal from the University Faculty Council and suggested by-laws for the A&S Dean’s Advisory Council. The Dean stated that these two initiatives emerged independently but that A & S faculty should be involved in discussing each of them. The dean introduced Jan French and Jennifer Erkulwater (both representing University Faculty Council) to speak about the Faculty Senate proposal that is being prepared for discussion. Planning for a Senate proposal started in the spring of 2013, with a study of faculty governance at peer institutions. A draft proposal should be ready for review and discussion at a February faculty meeting. In addition, faculty may read about the Council’s work via minutes on the UFC Blackboard website. The proposal has important implications for A&S, as the largest school within the university. The Dean urges A&S faculty to pay attention to the proposal, read it carefully and offer good discussion and support. Faculty members need to be involved in this initiative. The goal is develop a proposal that can gain the support of the faculty, the administration and the Board of Trustees. There will be many questions to discuss, including the character of representation, but the UFC is hoping to move forward with the proposal through active deliberations.
B. By-laws for the Dean’s Advisory Council
Dean Skerrett then discussed the draft of the Provisions for the Operations of the Dean’s Advisory Council. The Dean reminded everyone of the mandate and membership of the advisory council. The current document represents bylaws for the group and reflects how process has developed over the past two years. All of the operations described are currently practiced except for the election of a Chair of DAC. The draft reflects the original mandate, describes the election process, the creation of meetings and the election of the chair.
The dean envisions the Chair of the DAC functioning in similar fashion to the Chair of Tenure & Promotion committee. She noted that the last two provisions concerning avoidance of impropriety and confidentiality are very important to a culture of shared governance.
Nicole Sackley asked about the role of the chair and does the chair become a liaison to the faculty? Would faculty members bring other issues to the chair, not just budget concerns? Dean Skerrett said that has not been proposed and noted that it would be a big change. Nicole suggested that it is important to make the role clear to faculty. The Dean noted that the chair would play a strong role in the Dean’s Advisory Council, but the position would not serve as a chair of the faculty.
Sydney Watts asked about the secret ballot process in Dean’s Advisory Council. Dean Skerrett explained the Dean does not have a vote, just the council members.
Advisory Council members who are elected to represent department chairs would step down if they no longer serve as department chairs. Michelle Hamm commented that if they continued it would be against the spirit of the Council development. She stated that within the Council you are representing your tripartite divisions, but you are also representing what is best for the school.
It was noted that the Planning and Priorities representatives do not report back to the Dean’s Advisory Council.
A question was raised regarding what recourse do department members on the Council have regarding a departmental proposal? Dean Skerrett stated that the Council can invite department chairs or program coordinators to offer further information or clarification. Ultimately, the Dean has to make a decision based on recommendations and limited resources. Bill Myers recommended the inclusion of a paragraph that would further describe the expected scope and perspective of the Council Members.
Dan Palalazzo argued that representatives on the Council can speak for their tripartite division by offering shared perspective rather than advocacy. Those present agreed that sharing a perspective is most important. The ultimate goal is to serve the School of Arts & Sciences as a whole.
Dean Skerrett expressed the desire to approve the Advisory Council by-laws by the end of the semester, but if this does not occur, the conversation can continue next fall. However, this is an opportune time to move forward. The Dean thanked the faculty for their attendance and the meeting adjourned at 5:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lucretia McCulley
No comments:
Post a Comment