November 18, 2014 Academic Council Meeting Minutes

The dean called the meeting to order at 10:35.

1. Approval of Minutes of November 4, 2014

Dr. Jon Dattelbaum moved approval of the minutes of November 4, 2014. Dr. Michelle Hamm seconded. With no further discussion the minutes were approved by voice vote.

2.  Proposed Change to Political Science Major—Dr. Dan Palazzolo

Dr. Dan Palazzolo moved approval of a proposed change to the Political Science major. Dr. Con Beausang seconded the motion.

Dr. Palazzolo explained that the Department of Political Science had voted to eliminate the option that students can count 1 unit outside of the major from an approved list of courses toward the 10 units required to complete the major. The requirement will now be that students take 10 units of Political Science courses to complete the major.

With no further discussion the motion was approved by voice vote.

3. Proposed Changes to the Film Studies Major and Minor—Dr. Abigail Cheever

Dr. Abigail Cheever moved approval of a proposed change to the Film Studies major and minor. Dr. Sydney Watts seconded the motion.

Dr. Cheever explained that the film studies program proposes to revise its major and minor to 1) strongly emphasize the connections between analysis and production, 2) increase flexibility for students and faculty, and 3) clarify the curriculum by grouping courses by subject matter. The revised major and minor requirements will communicate clearly to students the inseparability of analytical and creative work, ensure students have some experience of film production upon graduation, and further emphasize the interdisciplinary nature of film studies.

With no further discussion the motion was approved by voice vote.

4. Academic Program Review Cycles

The next order of business was the Academic Program Review Cycles. Dr. Skerrett mentioned that the Provost, Dr. Jacque Fetrow, supports the process outlined in the Academic Program Review Policy.

She then asked for volunteers for the first cohort to undergo review in 2015-2017. The following programs were volunteered: Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Biology, Computer Science, Environmental Studies, Geography, International Studies, Philosophy, Politics, Economics and Law (PPEL), and Political Science.

Associate Dean Wang will gather the first cohort in spring 2015 to prepare for the review cycle.

5. A&S Rules for Travel Reimbursement

Dr. Skerrett noted that the departments collectively have not, in any year, expended the travel budgets allocated to them. Therefore the challenge needs to be identified: is it the level of allocation across the departments, or is it the level of reimbursement for individual travel opportunities?

Dr. Skerrett explained that the Rules for the Departmental Faculty Travel Funds could be revised to accommodate reimbursement for up to $70 for each day away for personal meal and incidental expenses. The current reimbursement cap was for up to $50 for each day away.

Dr. Skerrett also said that a small amendment could be added to the Rules that allows that the Travel Budget should be used to fully support one trip for each faculty member per year for professional development. Dr. Skerrett noted that Department Chairs will manage these funds, and they may recommend funding for a faculty member’s second trip, the funds of which would come from the Exceptions Budget managed by the Associate Dean.

Dr. Michelle Hamm confirmed that if the department has sufficient funds, the department chair may approve reimbursement of a second conference and/or reimbursement of more than $1600 to an individual faculty member. 

Dr. Yvonne Howell brought up the expense of international plane tickets. Dr. Howell explained that the ticket(s) alone often exceed the $1600 limit. Dr. Skerrett concluded that international travel for professional development may require separate consideration.

Dr. Con Beausang asked for per diem rather than submission of receipts. Dr. Joan Neff concurred.

Dr. Skerrett said that this is not in her purview, but she believes that accounting is reviewing this policy, especially for international travel.

6. Discussion: Merit Rubric for Teaching Evaluation in Three-Year Review

The final order of business was discussion on a Merit Rubric for Teaching Evaluation in Three-Year Review. Dr. Skerrett asked for suggestions regarding what criteria should merit excellence in teaching evaluation.

Dr. Dan Palazzolo mentioned consistency. Dr. Palazzolo also echoed Dr. Sydney Watt’s suggestion that faculty members be rewarded for teaching General Education classes.

Dr. Michelle Hamm noted that one benefit of a Three-Year Review would be its ability to more accurately assess the trajectory of teaching in a course.  

Dr. Sydney Watts noted that the Three-Year Review would encourage faculty to take risks outside of their field. This will provide for more exploration in pedagogy.

Dr. Con Beausang and many others shared the sentiment that there should be no comprehensive rubric that all of the departments use. There are many different expectations for excellence among departments.

The meeting adjourned at 11:48.

Respectfully submitted,

Matt Oglesby