1. Approval of
Minutes of AC Meeting November 3, 2015
Dr. Sam Abrash
moved approval of the minutes of November 3, 2015. Dr. Bill Ross seconded. With
no further discussion, the minutes were approved by voice vote.
2. Revised
Course Proposals
HIST 218, HIST
290, MLC 135, and MLC 140 were brought to the floor as revised course
proposals. Dr. Michelle Hamm motioned to approve the revised course proposals.
Dr. Sam Abrash seconded. With no further discussion, the revised course
proposals were approved by voice vote.
3. New Course
Proposals
HIST 220, HIST
244, HIST 300, HIST 326, and MATH 289 were proposed as new courses. Dr. Mike Kerckhove
motioned to approve the new course proposals. Dr. Bill Ross seconded. The revised
course proposals were approved by voice vote.
4. Overview of
A&S Associate Professors – Dr. Ben Broening
Dean Skerrett
asked Dr. Ben Broening, Associate Dean, to create a portrait of the School of
Arts & Sciences associate professors from a couple of different vantage
points. Dr. Ben Broening presented on this.
Following the
presentation, Dr. Dan Palazzolo asked if there were any data about the timing
of promotion. Dr. Ben Broening answered that he has been talking with the
Office of Institutional Effectiveness about this very question, but there is no
data to present as of yet. There will be more to come in that regard.
5. Promotion
Standards from Associate to Full Professor
Dean Skerrett reviewed
Appendix VI from the Faculty Handbook, identifying the standards used by Tenure
& Promotion Committee. The Faculty Handbook reflects revisions that were
made pursuant to recommendation by an Ad Hoc Committee several years ago. Dean
Skerrett noted that the standards anticipate many pathways to Full Professor,
although candidates must meet the standard in each area of teaching,
scholarship, and service.
Dr. Bill Ross
suggested giving out the guidelines to all associate professors so that they
could read the requirements and make a judgment about whether or not to come up
for promotion.
Dr. Yvonne
Howell observed that if A & S treated promotion like tenure, with a fixed
timeline, more individuals would come up. The bigger problem, Dr. Howell
argued, is a disconnect between the 6-10 timeframe and the reality of many
individuals’ careers.
Dr. Hugh West
concurred with this point.
Dr. Dan
Palazzolo suggested that some divisions might be making promotion more often
than other divisions because their promotion timeline fit better the 6-10
guidelines.
Dr. Doug
Winiarski, who serves on the Tenure & Promotion Committee, argued that the
case might sound different for humanists than for scientists and professors in
other divisions, but the case can still be made using the guidelines the School
of Arts & Sciences currently has.
Dr. Sam Abrash
brought up the fact that the only differentiating factor in the guidelines between
associate and full professor is “continued progress”.
Dr. Paul Achter
suggested that it would be a bad idea to have more codified guidelines because
both humanists and scientists must go through the promotion process, and codified
guidelines might limit or confuse their chances at promotion.
Dr. Yvonne
Howell agreed that broader, more general guidelines are better because we live
in a new age, with new ways of disseminating information.
Dean Skerrett
observed that faculty members may come up after the 6-10 year window and that
many faculty have done so. The 6-10 year window suggests a timeframe but it
does not close the window if an individual does not have a promotion review
during that frame.
The Ad Hoc
Committee on Promotions asked for data to be shared with them. Dean Skerrett
said that her office would be doing that.
6. Pre-Holiday
Class Attendance – Dr. Libby Gruner
Dr. Libby Gruner,
Associate Dean, raised the issue of pre-holiday class attendance. Before the
Thanksgiving holiday, a student wrote to a faculty member saying that all of
her other classes had been cancelled, so she was planning to leave early and
thus miss class.
Dr. Bill Ross and
Dr. Hugh West suggested that a message to professors from the Dean’s Office requiring
professors to hold classes would be a good idea. Dr. Louis Schwartz brought up
the idea that a message sent to the students from the Dean’s Office would be a
good idea, too.
7. Results of
Survey of Dean’s Office Communication – Dr. Jon Dattelbaum
Dr. Jon
Dattelbaum, Chair of the Dean’s Advisory Council, presented to Academic Council
the results of the Survey of the Dean’s Office Communication. Before his
presentation, the Dean, Associate Deans, and staff left the room.
