Thursday, January 22, 2015

January 20, 2015 A&S Faculty Meeting Minutes

Arts and Sciences Faculty Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, January 20, 2015
4:00 p.m.


Dean Kathleen Skerrett called the meeting to order at 4:01 p.m. in the Brown-Alley Room, Weinstein Hall. Bill Ross moved approval of Academic Council Actions from January 20, 2015. Louis Schwartz seconded the motion and the faculty voted to approve.

Arts and Sciences Website Redesign

Dean Skerrett introduced Andrea Almoite, Arts and Sciences Content Coordinator, University Communications.  The Dean reminded the faculty that Andrea works specifically with A&S, but she is part of the Office of Communications.  Andrea presented information on the Arts and Sciences website redesign that is underway.  She thanked the faculty and departments who have served as early partners in shaping the redesign.  New emphases include the creation of stories that can be shared across the university’s website, along with improved faculty highlights, alumni testimonials and features about current faculty-student research. Much of the content remains the same, with the addition of enhanced visual components.  Andrea also described changes with the Arts and Sciences division website and demonstrated unique websites for both internal and external information.

After Andrea completed her presentation, Dean Skerrett opened the floor to questions. Jan French asked about alumni testimonials and who would be responsible for developing them.  Andrea replied that Communications can assist with the interview design and production.  Maya White asked if student work can be used and recognized on a department website, especially visual work, such as in Theatre and Dance.  Andrea commented that they are working on capturing visuals and creating descriptions.  Eugene Wu asked about the ability to highlight research and provide a description. Bill Myers made the suggestion to include information about joint appointments and affiliations with the faculty profiles. Jon Dattlebaum encouraged the addition of information from the A&S Faculty Research Committee.  The faculty also shared ideas of how to highlight the different divisions of Arts and Sciences.

Program Based Budget Process

Dean Skerrett presented information on this year’s program based budget process (PBB).  This process has focused on developing ways that department heads can create proposals in a consistent way for faculty leaders. The overall goal is shared governance. Now in its third year, a routine and tested process is emerging. The Dean emphasized that part of shared governance is to report out to others and she would like to share the current outcomes with the faculty.  She reiterated that the Dean is responsible for making final budget approvals, but there is room for divergent views.

Dean Skerrett noted that Jon Dattelbaum has served as the first faculty chair of the Dean’s Advisory Council (DAC), a new role for faculty.  She explained that Jon is administering the meetings and facilitating the discussions.

Through the use of PowerPoint slides, Dean Skerrett reviewed the PBB Process, including the solicitation of requests, preparation of documents and the review of documents by the DAC. The Dean explained the use of the surplus budget and the study of how to reallocate.  DAC approves the reallocation of the surplus and makes recommendations.  The Dean then makes the final decision on the reallocation and specific funding requests for Planning and Priorities.

Dean Skerrett highlighted that five departments asked for an increase in funding enhancements for operating budgets and seven departments asked for one time, non-continuing funds. Position requests emerged as the largest budget request.  At this time, DAC received seven tenure-stream positions and one director position.  Five of the requests were approved.

The Dean also noted that increases to student employment budgets are received each year, but she handles these requests through the Dean’s office and reallocations from other A&S departments that are underspent.


The Dean ended the discussion on PBB with her plan to report out to various departments and faculty groups.

Tze Loo asked about the current search and title for the
NEH Assistant Professor of Chinese Studies.  Dean Skerrett explained that is was funded with seed money form NEH.  This position represents an area that is both emerging and underdeveloped at this time

Jon Dattlebaum offered reflections on the role of DAC Chair.  He commented that it is an insightful way to review the overall requests and needs.   He presented a visual timeline for DAC, outlining the proposals submissions and decision dates.  The timeline will be posted on the A&S website.

Dean Skerrett reiterated the importance of building a structure and process of shared faculty governance with the budget process.  She continues to be open to questions and suggestions. 

Tze Loo reported that UFC is working on the transition to Faculty Senate and encouraged all faculty to attend the UFC meeting on Feb. 9 at 3 p.m.

Dean Skerrett thanked the faculty for their attendance and the meeting adjourned at 5:01 p.m.

The next A&S faculty meeting will be held on February 12, 2015, at 4:00 p.m. in the Brown Alley Room, Weinstein Hall.












Tuesday, January 20, 2015

January 20, 2015 A&S Faculty Meeting Agenda

Agenda


Our discussion agenda will be:

1. Approval of Actions of Academic Council, January 20, 2015

2. Website Redesign—Andrea Almoite
  • Departments
  • A&S Faculty Portal

3. PBB Process
  • DAC Process—Dr. Jon Dattelbaum
  • Presentation of Outcomes—Dean Skerrett

Our next faculty meeting will be held on February 12, 2015, at 4:00 p.m. in the Brown Alley Room, Weinstein Hall.

Friday, January 16, 2015

Academic Council Agenda 1.20.15


Academic Council
January 20, 2015, 10:30-11:45 a.m.
Tyler Haynes 305

Please review the agenda below and the cited materials in advance of the meeting.

Agenda

1. Approval of Minutes of AC Meeting December 2,2014
2. New Course Proposals

3. Changes to Majors, Minors, and Concentrations

4. Proposed changes to BS Degree—Dr. Malcolm Hill
5. Publishing—Dr. Paul Achter
6. Program-based Budgeting Process
  • Presentation of Outcomes—Dean Skerrett
  • DAC Timeline—Dr. Jon Dattelbaum

7. Teaching Assignment Projection—Dr. Vincent Wang

Our next meeting will be February 3, 2015, from 10:30-11:45 a.m. in THC 305.

Continuing Agenda Items:
  • Restricted funds and Advancement. We will engage Advancement leaders to attend AC meeting in early 2015.
  • Revision to Guideline to provide for three-year merit review for tenured faculty.
  • Discussion: Proposed Three-Year Review for Tenured Faculty: Will this save time?—Dr. Geoff Goddu
  • Proposed Revision of Department Travel Budget Guidelines




December 2, 2014 Academic Council Meeting Minutes

The dean called the meeting to order at 10:32.

1. Approval of Minutes of November 18, 2014

Dr. Michelle Hamm moved approval of the minutes of November 18, 2014. Dr. Jon Dattelbaum seconded. With no further discussion the minutes were approved by voice vote.

2.  FERPA/Recommendation reminder—Dr. Sam Abrash

Dr. Sam Abrash reminded the Council that in order for a faculty member or academic advisor to act as a reference for a job application, this release needs to be provided by the applicant and filled out.

Susan Breeden, Registrar, reiterated the fact that this form allows for educational record sharing in the case of job applications. It does not apply to school-related applications.

3. Update on DAC Process—Dr. Jon Dattelbaum

Dr. Jon Dattelbaum, first Chair of DAC, spoke of the DAC process in general, the changes that have been made, and outlined a few of the Chair of DAC’s responsibilities. He noted that the Dean used to lead DAC meetings, whereas now the Chair does.  

Dr. Dattelbaum then asked the faculty for their thoughts on the DAC timeline: are the spring and fall deadlines working, or does the timeline need to be revised?

Dr. Sydney Watts asked when the faculty could expect to hear from DAC concerning position approvals.

Dr. Linda Boland suggested a diagram (or flowchart) to help visualize the DAC timeline.

It is the chair’s responsibility to arrange and lead private meetings without the Dean.
DAC can convene without the Dean if there is a majority.

4. Proposed Revision of Department Travel Budget Guidelines

The next order of business was the Proposed Revision of Department Travel Budget Guidelines. The Dean summarized the proposed changes, presently in draft form, and then asked the Council for their thoughts.

Dr. Bill Ross expressed the sentiment, shared by many in the Council, that an explicitly stated cap was perhaps misleading in regards to the Dean’s intentions. The Dean agreed and suggested eliminating from the Guidelines the clause that sets forth the cap. Instead, the Dean suggested allocating a travel budget to the departments based on per capita continuing faculty members. The department chair would then manage the budget to fully reimburse each faculty member’s first professional development trip.

Dr. Doug Winiarski argued that the clause setting forth the cap should be kept. Dr. Yvonne Howell, among others, supported this sentiment. 

Dr. Linda Boland asked about continuing faculty: will this revision to the Department Travel Budget Guidelines provide for faculty directors? The Dean confirmed that it will, as she does not want to promote a “second-class system,” whereby continuing faculty are excluded from departmental allocation.

The Dean concluded by reminding the Council that the intention of this revision to the Department Travel Budget Guidelines is to offer discretion to the department chairs when it comes to fully reimbursing each faculty member’s first professional development trip.

The meeting adjourned at 11:45.

Respectfully submitted,

Matt Oglesby