Dean Skerrett called the meeting to order at 10:31a.m.
The minutes of the April 1, 2014 were approved.
The consent agenda was approved by unanimous consent.
New Course Proposal Process:
Malcolm Hill, associate dean, explained the recommended online course proposal process to council members. The new process will give department chairs and program coordinators the ability to submit their proposals online. Dr. Hill reviewed the online webpage and explained the form changes. A faculty member requested a button for proposals with small amendments in order to avoid having to complete the entire proposal process to change, for example, a title or some wording. Dr. Hill will look into making this change. It was asked how the online submission process would impact Academic Council’s review of proposals. Dr. Hill answered by stating that he believes the new process with clear deadlines will aid in the review of the course proposals. This would also help the dean’s office build the agenda for Academic Council meetings.
Merit Review Process:
The dean presented a report to Academic Council on the merit review process.
The impact of the triennial schedule has begun to affect the workload associated with the annual performance review process. The number of complete dossiers submitted this year was almost one third less than the number submitted last year. The dean reviewed the steps of the merit review process and explained how the dean’s office makes merit decisions. Dean Skerrett stated that more than half the faculty earned a merit score of “excellent” or higher for work performed in the previous academic year.
Dean Skerrett explained that the Board of Trustees this year authorized a three percent increase in the salary pool for raises based on merit. All salary increases for this academic year are merit sensitive except for faculty members in their first year of service. They received a raise that advances their salary against the benchmark. The dean set out the dollar amounts associated with promotion bumps and stated that such promotion bumps will be awarded in the coming years.
The triennial schedule for each department will be updated in the Dean’s office and sent to department chairs. Everyone must submit an annual review dossier, but tenured faculty members who are represented on the department’s triennial schedule as year B or C may submit a short dossier.
It was suggested that it would be a good practice to inform the department chair in a case where there was a discrepancy in merit scores. The dean responded that she plans to send out notifications of changes to scores after the salary letters are sent. There is still a need to discuss calibration of merit across departments. Dean Skerrett added that sharing department rubrics with Academic Council would be helpful to give some idea of how colleagues are assessing merit.
It was asked if the dean would clarify service responsibilities since many committee members roll over each year. The dean stated that service to the department, service to the School of Arts and Sciences or University are given weight although significant service to professional organizations is also weighed.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:48 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Zandria Haines
No comments:
Post a Comment