EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Present: Bryant,
DiMagno, Prochaska-Cue,
Sawyer, Whitt, Wolf
Absent: Fuller,
King, Logan-Peters, Miller, Scheideler, Siekman, Spann
Date:
Location: 420 University Terrace, Academic Senate
Office
1.0 Call to
Order
Bryant called the meeting to order at
2.0 Announcements
2.1 Take
a Parent to Lunch Invitation
Bryant
reported that members of the Executive Committee have been invited to take a
parent to lunch during new student enrollment.
He suggested that anyone interested contact him.
2.2 Doctoral
Hooding Ceremony
Bryant
announced that the doctoral hooding ceremony is scheduled for May 10th. He recommended that those interested in
attending should contact the bookstore to order their gowns.
2.3 Campus
Visit of David Ricketts
Bryant
reported that David Ricketts, Director of Parking and Transportation at the
2.4 Head
Count of Faculty on Campus
Bryant
distributed information on the number of tenure and tenure track faculty from
1989 through the present. The committee
noted that for the last three years the number of tenured/tenure track faculty
members have decreased. Wolf asked if
there was information regarding the number of students enrolled during this
time period. DiMagno
pointed out that there will be an additional significant decrease next year
because of the extremely low level of faculty hiring this year. Wolf noted that the decrease in faculty is
troublesome given the emphasis on recruiting and retaining students. DiMagno stated that
information on part time faculty and instructors for the same period of time
should be examined. Bryant stated that
this information would be helpful and that he would try to get it.
2.5 New Schedule of Classes Catalog
Bryant reported that he has received complaints about the picture of the new baseball diamond on the schedule of classes catalog. He noted that people are asking why an athletic field is being portrayed on the cover of a catalog dealing with academics.
3.0 Charity
Martin, Chair of Honors Convocation Committee
3.1 Changes to the Honors Convocation
Ceremony
Martin reported that the administration wanted to change the Honors
Convocation ceremony because it felt that students were not getting the
recognition intended by the event. She
noted that the administration also wanted the ceremony moved out of the
coliseum. She reported that the ceremony
has been divided into two sections this year.
On April 12th beginning at 3:30, “Rising Scholars” will be
recognized. These are first year
students with a 3.6 gpa and
above and sophomore students with a 4.0 gpa. Those students with a 4.0 gpa will be individually recognized and they will be
handed a red Convocation folder by the Chancellor. Martin noted that those students with a gpa of 3.6 and above will be
recognized as a group. After the
students have been recognized, the Chancellor will announce the College
Distinguished Teaching Awards and Service Awards.
Martin reported that recognition of “University Scholars” will be
conducted on April 13th at the
Bryant asked if one of the reasons for these changes is due to increase
in size of the Honors Convocation ceremony.
Martin stated that this was correct and that the desire to move the
ceremony to the
Sawyer pointed out that the ceremony is good public relations for the
university. He asked if parents are
notified of their child’s accomplishments and the ceremony. Martin stated that letters are sent out to
all parents. Wolf stated that the timing
of the ceremonies does not reflect the lifestyles of today’s students who often
work 20 – 30 hours per week and who cannot attend the ceremony due to a conflict
with work. He noted that many of the
colleges have not determined when and where their ceremony will be held.
Martin noted that in the past a good portion of the ceremony was spent on
faculty awards. She noted that many
students were not returning to the ceremony because the majority of the event
was spent on faculty awards rather than student awards. She stated that the faculty awards will now
be split up between the Honors Convocations ceremonies and the State of the
University address. DiMagno
suggested that faculty awards should not be distributed at the Honors
Convocation ceremony for students, but instead they should be distributed in
front of other faculty. He noted that a
few faculty award winners could speak to the students at the Honors Convocation
ceremony. Bryant pointed out that at
many institutions, faculty awards are handled by the Academic Senate.
Martin stated that the committee plans on discussing grade
inflation. She pointed out that the
number of students receiving recognition for honors has grown significantly
over the past several years. DiMagno suggested that a way to prevent this from occurring
would be to normalize grades. Martin
stated that the committee is considering using ranking in the college rather
than gpa to determine
honors. DiMagno
noted that this would be difficult to do in large colleges. Martin stated that the committee will be
looking at the standards used to determine honors standing. She noted that changes might be made next
year regarding these standards.
Wolf stated that it will be difficult for colleges to schedule their
recognition ceremony, particularly if many of the colleges attempt to hold the
ceremony at the same time and are competing for venues. Martin stated that the committee is not
anticipating colleges to have their recognition ceremony scheduled at the same
time as the Honors Convocation ceremony.
She stated that the certificates will still be handled by administration
and that the college will not have to absorb this cost. DiMagno pointed out
that the doctoral hooding ceremony is a good ceremony that should be continued.
4.0 Approval
of
The approval of the minutes was postponed due
to the lack of a quorum.
5.0 Salary
Proposal – New Way to Allocate Salary Raises
Wolf stated that he was greatly disturbed to learn that the
administrators of a university that is touted to be a great research
institution could make a miscalculation with the salary increases, especially during
these times of budget cutting. He stated
that the Chancellor should have apologized at the Senate meeting on this
error. Bryant stated that the Executive
Committee will ask the Chancellor to elaborate on the miscalculation when they
next meet with him. Wolf stated that he
is now very concerned with the amount of salary increase that will be left for
faculty once the Vice Chancellors and Deans take their cut of the
increase. Bryant pointed out that the
faculty needs to ask for more funding for an increase. He reported that he received a proposal to
structure the increase differently than in the past. He noted that the proposal would make salary
increases more equitable. He pointed out
that the proposal calls for higher paid faculty to receive less of a percentage
increase, although they would receive more in money than lower paid faculty who
would receive less actual money but a higher percentage of increase. Bryant suggested that the committee might
want to propose this new structure to the Faculty Compensation Advisory
Committee.
Wolf asked how other institutions handle faculty raises. DiMagno stated that
typically the decisions are normally made within the department at other
institutions. Whitt noted that in his
department faculty are awarded points for teaching, service, or research. He stated that each point is worth so much
money. He pointed out that this system
allows everyone in the department to be evaluated on the same basis.
DiMagno pointed out that the proposed system is arbitrary. Whitt stated that it could lead to salary
compression and Bryant noted that it does not take into account the performance
of a faculty member. Sawyer suggested
that the FCAC look at a variety of different methods to determine faculty
salary increases. DiMagno
pointed out that departments need to have greater control over salary increases. He noted that this is a faculty governance
issue, and that there are several effective methods by which reallocation may
be carried out by the administration; the additional tool of annual salary
increases is not needed. The committee
discussed the problems associated with keeping the raises strictly within the
department. Bryant suggested that the
committee should take a position regarding department chairs and how long they
should be able to hold this position. He
stated that the committee should discuss this issue with Chancellor Perlman.
6.0 Unfinished Business
6.1 NCAA
Interim Report
Bryant reported that the campus is required by the NCAA to provide an interim report on the progress being made on recommendations made by the NCAA Committee on Athletics Certification. He distributed a copy of the report to the committee. Bryant noted that a faculty member of the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee has concerns with the report. This faculty member has asked that the Gender Subcommittee of the IAC be activated to review the formal report made by Lamarr Daniels, the outside consultant hired by the Athletics Department to investigate the department’s practices in regards to gender equity issues. The committee agreed that Bryant should meet with the chair of IAC and the faculty member to see if they can get the subcommittee activated.
6.2 Evaluation of Administrators
Sawyer reported that the subcommittee to work on the evaluation of administrators would be meeting next week and would report back to the committee at the next meeting. Sawyer stated that the subcommittee would be reviewing instruments used at other institutions. DiMagno suggested that the Senate could collect evaluations on administrators at the Dean level or above and publish excerpts each year. He proposed that the findings of the evaluations should be made available to the administrators. Bryant pointed out that there is no correlation between administrators and low enrollment in their colleges. Sawyer pointed out that this is one of the reasons why it is important to establish independent evaluations of administrators.
6.3 Nominations to the Executive Committee
The committee discussed potential candidates to run for election in April for Executive Committee membership.
7.0 New Business
There was no new business to discuss.
The meeting was adjourned at