Present: Fred Sauls, Chair, Jennifer McClinton-Temple, Joan Coffin, Trent Snider. Charlie Brooks, Jim Dolhon, Howard Fedrick, Nick Holodick, Guest, Dan Ghezzi, Guest representing A and P

The meeting was called to order a few minutes after 2:00 p.m. in the Lipo Room.

Discussion of the Major Coordinator's Position

Copies of the description of the position had been distributed prior to the meeting. The following comments were made:

Proposed name changes, including "Academic Program Coordinator," "Academic Coordinator," and "Academic Discipline Coordinator."

Compensation was discussed. The original document calls for the position to receive the equivalent of 2/3rds of a teaching overload per semester. We discussed the need for flexibility here, given that people in these positions would have vastly differing workloads based on several different factors. Dan Ghezzi noted that A and P would be in favor of a baseline minimum. The consensus on Council was for a baseline minimum as well.

We also discussed one faculty member's suggestion, emailed to Council beforehand, that the position be automatically created when the chair of a department does not have a specialty in a major within the department. This was rejected on the grounds that different departments have different situations regarding the "relatedness" of specialties and majors. It was agreed that the creation of the position be automatically considered when the above situation occurs.

Finally, the proposal was amended to include the following changes:

o The name of the position was changed to "Academic Coordinator."

o Language was added that the Vice President of Academic Affairs, in conjunction with the department, will make these appointments.

o The stipend minimum was changed to the equivalent of one course per year.

The form, which was distributed to Council before the meeting, is meant for faculty use in evaluating the Dean of the Faculty and the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

Dr. Holodick asked that the rating scale match the scale on the recently approved forms for the evaluation of department chairs and the evaluation of faculty by department chairs.

We discussed the language regarding the acknowledgment of mistakes or errors, finally agreeing on "recognizes and corrects errors."

It was suggested that, as with the other forms mentioned above, the job descriptions of the various positions be sent along with the form.

Three changes were made to the previous version of the form, one, regarding the mission, was requested by the Board. The other two were to ensure that no taxable income would result from money awarded through Senior Faculty Development. These changes were approved and the revised version will be sent to the Board.

Dan Ghezzi distributed the "Faculty Evaluation of Chairperson's" form and noted that it had been put into bubble sheet format. Dr. Ghezzi reported that the membership of A and P were unanimous in preferring the "non-bubbled" sheet. Council agreed and the form will remain "non-bubbled."

Trent Snider gave a brief report from C and T. The committee met with Fr. Tom Looney, C.S.C., Chair of Theology on April 10, 2006 to discuss the theology requirement in the Core. The committee has two meetings left for the year and will continue toward a draft of the new Core by year's end.

Dr. Sauls noted that General Elections will be held soon.

Meeting was adjourned at 3:06 pm.

Respectfully submitted,

Jennifer McClinton-Temple

Senior Faculty Development is a formative review process for all faculty members who are tenured, on academic appointment, as well as professional specialists who have been promoted to associate clinical/technical professor or clinical/technical professor.

The Senior Faculty Development provides a review of a faculty member's professional work and a plan to develop long-term academic and professional interests.

The College will provide the faculty member with assistance, including dedicated funds, to achieve mutually beneficial goals.

The faculty member will create a plan and report his or her performance as part of the annual report. This performance will be reviewed annually with the chair. (See PART III, Section VII).

The results will be considered as part of applications for promotion, tenure, or merit pay.

 

The purposes of the Senior Faculty Development Program are to: (1) encourage the professional growth of senior faculty members, (2) provide College resources to assist that growth, (3) account for use of those resources, and (4) report on the professional development of the faculty member.

It is mandatory for all regular faculty members holding tenure or an academic appointment, and for professional specialists above the assistant (clinical or technical) professor rank. The first plan will be prepared the year after the faculty member’s receipt of tenure or an academic appointment, or promotion to associate (clinical or technical) professor; progress will be reported annually. The cycle will repeat at five year intervals.

The faculty member will form a committee consisting of the department chair (who will chair the committee), the Dean (and MSB Director if appropriate), and one other senior faculty member. If the faculty member is the department chair, another senior faculty member to chair the committee will be selected in consultation with the Dean or MSB Director.

The faculty member will submit to the committee:

(a) A current curriculum vitae.

(b) The last three annual activity reports.

(c) A brief (several pages) self-evaluative report on teaching, professional development, and service. If the faculty member has been tenured or promoted within the last 2 years, the P/T application may simply be referenced.

(d) A professional development plan addressing questions such as: How do I fit into the College future, i. e. what can I contribute to the College mission over the next 5 years? How can I meet the standards for promotion or merit pay? How can I improve my teaching? What areas do I need to develop in order to do these? What resources do I need? How do I propose to use the money available? How will I be evaluated?

The plan must explain the goals, how these fit the needs of the department and College, the resources required, and the expected outcomes. It should include any proposed sabbaticals or use of the Differential Workload policy. Criteria for judging the achievement of these goals must be specified.

The proposed uses of the funds must directly advance the faculty member’s development. They may be used: (1) to provide tangible items, such as books, computers, equipment, etc. These remain the property of the College, although they are dedicated to the faculty member’s use. (2) For travel to professional gatherings or to use resources not available locally; (3) to free time for scholarly work (e.g. "buying" a course reduction, paying a research assistant, …); (4) other purposes clearly serving to remove impediments to the faculty member’s professional development, providing these can be done without creating taxable income for the faculty member.

The committee will evaluate the plan in light of the likely benefits to the students and College. Upon committee approval of the plan (including the proposed use of funds), the College will establish a faculty development account containing $3500 for the faculty member’s exclusive use. Access to the funds will require the approval of the faculty member and the committee chair. The faculty member will receive an annual report on the account activity and balance.

The funds will be accounted for in a separate part of the faculty member’s annual report, which will be reviewed during the yearly meeting with the department chair (Dean or MSB Director for department chairs). The report must demonstrate that the funds were expended in accord with the plan. The chair will submit a brief report to the Dean or MSB Director, who will then forward it to the Dean.

The annual reports will also be submitted to the committee. During the third year, the committee will meet with the faculty member to review progress and make plan revisions if required. At any time, the Dean, MSB Director, or committee chair may call for a meeting to review the faculty member’s progress.

In evaluating the faculty member’s progress, the committee shall bear in mind that interests change and unexpected opportunities occur. Thus, the plan is not a contract. However, the committee must judge whether a sufficient level of appropriate professional development has taken place.

Satisfactory progress requires no action except a notation to that effect. If progress is deemed unsatisfactory, all disbursements will be halted as described below. Until the committee is satisfied with the progress, any faculty development expenditures will require the explicit approval of the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

At the end of the fifth year, any remaining funds revert to the College’s general fund. The process will then repeat. Subsequent plans shall address the results of the previous plan.

Faculty who do not have an approved plan, or whose performance within that plan is judged unsatisfactory, will be ineligible for any College faculty development funds. That is, no monies will be expended on behalf of that faculty member – from any College account – without explicit approval from the Vice President for Academic Affairs. In addition, the faculty member will be ineligible for sabbatical leave or merit pay.

Directions: Check the appropriate category for each statement. Please mention specific behaviors/events in the comment sections to highlight exceptional performance or areas of concern.

NB: UTJ = unable to judge

Overall satisfaction with this administrator: (please circle)

The Academic Coordinator position is created when the department chairperson, who is not specialized in certain program(s) within his/her department, requires assistance from a faculty member expert in that discipline regarding certain responsibilities.

This position may be created only when a department has multiple programs and is contingent upon the approval of the department. The coordinator will be appointed by the Vice President for Academic Affairs, in consultation with the department, for a two-year term on a renewable basis.

The Academic Coordinator, in conjunction with the department chairperson, assists in:

Searching for new faculty who will be primarily teaching in this program and for qualified part-time and/or adjunct faculty for courses in the program

Collecting assessment data for the program

Representing the program at college functions (e.g., visitation days, program for undecided students)

Responding to inquiries from prospective students and their parents regarding this program

Responding to inquiries from other employees (e.g., Registrar’s Office, Center for Life-Long Learning, Center for Experiential Learning)

Handling questions from the media regarding topics pertinent to the program

Scheduling courses pertinent to the program (e.g., determining which courses are needed in each semester to fulfill program requirements)

Reviewing the curriculum for the program and making the requisite changes to the college catalog

The Academic Coordinator will receive a minimum stipend equivalent to a one course overload per year, based on the demands of the position.