EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Present: Bryant, DiMagno,
Fuller, Logan-Peters, Miller, Sawyer, Siekman, Spann,
Wolf
Absent: King, Prochaska
Cue, Scheideler, Whitt
Date:
Location: 201 Canfield Administration Building
1.0 Call to
Order
Bryant called the meeting to order at
2.0 Announcements
No
announcements were made.
3.0 Chancellor
Perlman
3.1 Teaching and
Item postponed due to lack of time.
3.2
DiMagno reported that admission of graduate students is currently taking place
but that the letters of admission from the
3.3 Potential for Next Round of Reductions
Chancellor Perlman reported that indications
from the Appropriations Committee are that the state deficit could be $180
million. He stated that this could
result in the university receiving more cuts.
He pointed out that faculty should start contacting their state senators
to encourage them to support the university by opposing further budget
cuts. He noted that additional budget
cuts would take effect July 1st.
He stated that he does not want to make any further cuts that would
result in people losing their jobs. He
noted that he is unsure how and what he would cut if further budget cuts are required
of the university. He pointed out that
he is comforted in knowing that the process of budget cutting has been an open
one. He stated that he will be looking
at the Academic Planning Committee’s recommendations. He noted that there have been some faculty
members who have strongly supported the Teaching and
3.4 Communication with Executive Committee Over the Next Month
Bryant discussed this issue with the Chancellor in a previous
meeting. He noted that the Chancellor
will keep the committee informed of the budget situation.
3.5 Issues on the Horizon
Evaluation of Administrators
Bryant reported that the Committee believes that administration is not
getting all of the information it needs because people have concerns regarding
confidentiality of evaluations and fear of retaliation. He stated that the Committee is exploring the
possibility of the Senate conducting evaluation of administrators. He noted that an ad hoc committee has been
formed to review how the process is being done at other institutions. Chancellor Perlman
and SVCAA Edwards stated that accurate evaluations of administrators are
important and they would be interested in reading them.
Director of Admissions
Chancellor Perlman stated that negotiations
with a candidate for the position of Director of Admissions are currently
underway. SVCAA Edwards reported that
the Dean of Teachers College search would probably not take place until the completion
of the state’s site visit of the college and the national accreditation are
completed in the fall. Sawyer pointed
out that there should be a discussion within the college to determine what the
goals of the college are and what the college wants to be to the state before
the search begins. SVCAA Edwards stated that some professors in the
college are having these discussions and he encouraged the faculty members of
the college to be engaged in these conversations.
Redirecting Funds for Faculty
Positions
Chancellor Perlman reported that currently
Deans decide where funds from open faculty positions should go within their
college. He stated that the
administration is proposing to capture some of these funds in order to move
them to understaffed colleges. He stated
that a sufficient amount of funds would remain in the college in order to hire
a person at an entry level position, but any excess funds would revert to the
Office of Academic Affairs where it can then be moved to a different
college. He pointed out that departments
can argue against the transfer of the excess funds and that Deans would still
have flexibility within their own colleges because the core of the position
would remain. He noted that some
departments and colleges are in desperate need of resources. Wolf asked if the new Dean of Undergraduate
Studies would be involved in these decisions.
Chancellor Perlman responded that he/she would
be involved. Fuller wondered how this
change would impact the Dean’s budget.
4.0 SVCAA
Edwards/VC Owens
4.1 Search for Dean of Undergraduate Studies
VC Owens reported that there have been conceptual discussions on the
position of Dean of Undergraduate Studies but further discussions will be
needed to finalize the duties and responsibilities of this position. He stated that East Campus will be involved
because this position facilitates undergraduate studies on both campuses. SVCAA Edwards stated that a primary reason
for creating the position was to improve the college experience for freshmen
and sophomores. He stated that the
position will try to bridge the gap between Academic Affairs, Student Affairs,
and the Registrar’s Office. He noted
that they are trying to fund this position through reallocation of administration
funds. He pointed out that this position
will be the result of a shift and not an addition of an administrator.
Miller asked for clarification on the position and how it will work in
the present administrative structure of the campus. SVCAA Edwards stated that the Dean of
Undergraduate Studies would not have direct responsibility over students but
that a number of units, such as the honors program, foundations program, and
general studies, would report to this Dean.
He noted that the Curriculum Committee and other aspects of the
undergraduate program would fall under the responsibility of this Dean. He stated that plans call for the Office of
the Dean of Undergraduate Studies to be a resource center for students to
obtain information and to gain assistance for students in things such as applying
for awards and grants.
Wolf noted that the position sounds bureaucratic and he questioned how
this position would affect the quality of education. SVCAA Edwards stated that one of the points
of this position is to have it clearly defined as being the coordinator of
undergraduate academic offerings. He
noted that the Dean would meet with faculty of large classes to discuss various
problems and concerns they may have, work with Graduate Teaching Assistants to
improve their teaching, work with students and across college lines to improve
the undergraduate experience on campus.
Miller asked if Academic Affairs was currently doing some of this
work. SVCAA Edwards stated that some of
the work is currently being done in his office but that it is spread out among
several people. He noted that the Dean
of Undergraduate Studies would oversee and coordinate this work and would
assume leadership of the learning communities.
Sawyer pointed out that the main task of this Dean would be to work on
retaining students. He asked if there is
information indicating why students leave.
Chancellor Perlman stated that the Nowell Levitz consulting team is studying this problem and
information on it should be available in their report which is due in three
months.
Fuller asked if the search for this position would be internal or
external. SVCAA Edwards stated that he
originally started with the assumption that it would be an internal search
because local knowledge of the campus would be advantageous, but that an
external search is now being considered because of concerns expressed by a
number of people. He pointed out that an
external search would be more costly and that it would possibly strain the
budget. Wolf pointed out that someone
coming from the campus might feel beholden to the administrators which could possibly restrict or limit his/her
efforts. He noted that hiring someone
with a different vision from outside the university might be better and he
urged that a national search be conducted.
Sawyer suggested that the Levitz report might provide useful information
that would pertain to this position and that it would be wise to delay the
search until the report is made. Spann
suggested that the person hired should have recent undergraduate teaching
experience. He pointed out that students
today are much different from students in the past and that it would be helpful
to have someone who has experience working with them. Miller noted that retention and recruitment
of students is a huge issue that must be addressed. SVCAA Edwards pointed out that currently no
one oversees the retention of students.
He stated that this Dean would specifically focus on retaining first and
second year students. Bryant stated that
an argument for an external search is to avoid replicating what has already
been done on campus in regards to recruiting and retention of students. He stated that it would be helpful to get
someone with experience in these areas.
He pointed out that often an internal search is viewed as a way of just
advancing a pre-selected person. SVCAA
Edwards stated that no one has been pre-selected for this position and all
applications will be considered.
Bryant pointed out that there is a complicated maze of requirements for
undergraduate students that should be reviewed.
SVCAA Edwards stated that he hoped the Dean of Undergraduate Studies
could provide leadership in making the system easier for students. He pointed out that the requirements were
established by the faculty and that they would need to be consulted if any
changes were made to the requirements. DiMagno stated that there are concerns that students are
not getting adequate advising when they enter the university. Fuller stated that students attending New
Orientation Workshops are provided help and assigned advisors. She noted that if they are undeclared majors,
they fall under General Studies who assigns advisors for the students. SVCAA Edwards stated that many undeclared
students are in the College of Arts & Sciences and they have access to its
advising center.
Logan-Peters questioned whether the position should be classified as a
Dean. SVCAA Edwards stated that they
have looked at other institutions that have a similar position and they are
usually classified as a Dean. He stated
that administration hopes to have someone who can fully focus on undergraduate
studies. He pointed out that appointing
a Dean would also separate the position from the Office of Academic Affairs.
4.2 4.8% Proposal for Salary Increase and How it Might Be
Allocated
Bryant stated that the Executive Committee would like the Faculty
Compensation Advisory Committee (FCAC) to start working on their
recommendations for faculty salary increases.
He noted that the Executive Committee is concerned that the proposed
4.8% increase could be decreased. He
stated if this should occur, a satisfactory performance should receive a higher
percentage than what was given this past year.
SVCAA Edwards pointed out that the salary increase decision is
ultimately up to the Chancellor. He
noted that the Chancellor is committed to adjustments being made on the basis
of merit. He stated that there might be
a better way to handle the increases from the way it was done this past
year. VC Owens stated that increases
need to be tied to faculty performance which directly ties into the faculty
evaluations. He stated that he empathizes
with the Chairs in the difficulty of writing faculty evaluations. He pointed out that there seems to be a
disconnection between faculty evaluations and the percentage of increase
faculty members receive. Wolf noted that
many faculty members wonder if it is worth the effort of going through the
merit evaluation process when it results in increases skewed by the guidelines
established by the SVCAA. He asked SVCAA
Edwards if he could give his word not to duplicate next year the same restrictions
on the distribution of merit raises within departments mandated this year. The SVCAA stated no he can’t because other
people are doing the ratings for the evaluations. Wolf pointed out that the consequences had
something to do with the rules that department chairs received from the SVCAA. Wolf noted that the SVCAA is in the position
to modify those rules or to make them more clear or not put restrictions of the
sort that the SVCAA put on the department chairs last year. Fuller pointed out that the requirement for
having a range of increases for departments was particularly troublesome. SVCAA Edwards stated that the administration
is open to consideration of all ideas.
He suggested that people should not get prematurely entrenched in
defense of something that the administration is not yet committed to. He stated that the intent was to get away
from a situation where people don’t want to be candid on annual faculty
evaluations. He noted that there needs
to be a mechanism in place to prevent everyone in a department from being given
an above average evaluation.
Miller asked if the recommendations made by the FCAC are seriously
considered. SVCAA Edwards stated that
those recommendations are very important and no decisions concerning salary
increases are made until they are received.
He pointed out that the FCAC’s recommendations
may not be fully accepted but they definitely have an influence on the final
decisions that are made. He noted that
the FCAC was instrumental in helping to establish the increments of raises for
faculty promotions. VC Owens pointed out
that an issue that needs to be considered in regards to promotions is where the
funds will be coming from this year. He
noted that in the past open faculty lines have helped to provide these funds,
but these will no longer be available due to the budget cuts. Miller stated that the FCAC met last week and
discussed how market forces are determining faculty salaries. Bryant pointed out that faculty whose
workloads are increasing because of the budget cuts are concerned that this
increase in the workload will not be recognized and that they will not get much
of a salary raise. He stated that
faculty who are doing a large portion of the work need to be recognized.
4.3 Support for the Library
Bryant reported that he and President-Elect Miller met with Dean Giesecke to discuss the budget cuts to the library. He pointed out that this is an important
resource for campus community and that it will be badly hurt if they receive
more additional cuts. Everyone agreed
and stated that the budget cuts are hurting the campus.
4.4 Issues on the Horizon
VC Owens reported that he has received the names of candidates from the
search committee for the Dean of the
5.0 Unfinished
Business
No unfinished business was discussed.
6.0 New Business
No new business was discussed.
The meeting was adjourned at