Minutes
Faculty Council
November 4th, 2005
Present:
Dave Baggett, Charlie Brooks, Joan Coffin, Jim Dolhon, Claire Gilmore,
Marc Marchese, Jennifer McClinton-Temple, Trent Snider, &
Fred Sauls, Chair
The
meeting was called to order @ 2:00 p.m. in the Lipo Room of the
1.
A & P Report
Dr. Marchese updated Council on A & P’s current work on an
evaluation form with which faculty can provide feedback to their department
chairs regarding job performance.
It is on schedule to be brought to Council by semester’s end.
2.
C & T Report
Following Dr. McClinton-Temple’s (C & T Chair Elect) account
of her address to the Humanities Division regarding the current status of the
Core curriculum review process, “a spirited discussion was had by all ...”
The following represents a few selected highlights;
a.
C & T is working towards presenting a rough draft of a “Revised
Core” by the end of the 2006 Spring semester, and a final draft by Spring of
2007.
b.
The
next significant step in the process is the gathering of input & feedback
from Project Team Leaders regarding faculty response to their individual Core
courses via last year’s survey.
This process is scheduled for completion by Mid-February of 2006.
c.
Following that, C & T will circulate to all faculty a “Revised
Preamble to the Core” that will: affirm fundamental principles desirable in
the Revised Core Curriculum, articulate operating guidelines by which to execute
the revision process, and provide the means by which to demonstrate that
subsequent changes made to the current Core will better meet these principles.
d.
Council voiced
significant concern over the disproportionately high percentage of Core courses
(upwards of 75% with some course offerings) that are taught by part-time &
adjunct instructors.
3.
The Chair asked that Council “step back” for a moment in its
discussion of a new Senior Faculty Development Policy.
(He passed out a copy of the University of Portland’s Senior Faculty
Review Process - courtesy of Dr. Holodick - as a means of comparison.)
Dr. Sauls indicated that any policy we would enact would need to provide
for the ability to;
a) evaluate
levels of faculty activity, b)
distribute the resources and mechanisms by which to facilitate faculty
development, c) hold faculty accountable for use of such resources, and d)
consider consequences for blatant disregard of such processes.
He suggested that we may need to explore an effective way to integrate
into one coherent policy variant mechanisms currently in operation (i.e., the
Faculty Activity Summary, the Senior Faculty Review, Merit Pay,
Sabbatical).
Dr. Sauls further intimated that the Tenure & Promotion and
the Senior Promotion committees might be appropriate vehicles through
which to execute the new policy.
Council
will take up these and other issues related to the drafting of a new Senior
Faculty Development Policy at its next meeting.
The meeting was adjourned @
3:09p.m.
Respectfully
Submitted,
James
P. Dolhon