EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES

Present:          Alloway, Beck, Bradford, Bolin, Flowers, Ledder, Moeller, Stock, Zimmers                   

Absent:           Alexander, Hachtmann, Rapkin, Scholz

Date:               Wednesday, June 28, 2006

Location:        Academic Senate Office, 420 University Terrace

Note:   These are not verbatim minutes.  They are a summary of the discussions at the Executive Committee meeting as corrected by those participating.

______________________________________________________________________   

1.0       Call to Order

Moeller called the meeting to order at 2:31 p.m.

2.0       Announcements

            2.1       Cancellation of New Child Care Facility

Moeller reported that she received an email message from Vice Chancellor Jackson stating that the plans to open a new child care facility have been cancelled.  The email message stated that renovations to open the facility would cost $1.35 million more than is available for the center.  Moeller stated that the University will continue with the present childcare program because at this point there is no hope for funding to help cover the cost of a new facility.   She pointed out that this news is very discouraging because efforts to have an on-site daycare facility have been going on for a long time. 

Alloway wondered what will happen to the money that was going to be used for the new facility.  Moeller stated that she did not know but will ask the Chancellor this question when she sends him a letter conveying the disappointment of the Executive Committee on the cancellation of the efforts.  Beck pointed out that the money that has been set aside for a new child care facility needs to be protected for future use.

3.0       Approval of 5/31/06 and 6/14/06 Minutes

The Committee approved the minutes of 5/31/06 and 6/14/06 as amended.

4.0       Unfinished Business

No unfinished business was discussed.

5.0       New Business

5.1       Email Message on Unprofessional Behavior

Bradford reported that he received an email message from a faculty member regarding unprofessional conduct.  He noted that the faculty member wanted the complaint brought to the attention of the Executive Committee and a formal complaint will be made to the Academic Rights and Responsibilities Committee. 

5.2       Professor Prochaska-Cue – Grade Changes Made by Administrators

Prochaska-Cue, Chair of the Academic Rights and Responsibilities Committee, reported that she has been contacted by faculty members who are concerned with the Graduate Studies Office changing a student’s grade to a W without consulting with the instructor.  She noted that the faculty members are concerned that the decision to grant a grade of W does not follow a formal process and decisions are made on a case-by-case basis. 

Prochaska-Cue stated that the faculty members raised three concerns:  1) that a W can be given without documentation of the criteria that were used in making the decision; 2) that students may not be encouraged to work things out with a faculty member; and 3) that it could be seen as an attempt to protect a student’s grade point average. 

Moeller noted that the Graduate Bulletin states that a student can drop a course three-quarter of the way through the semester if the Graduate Studies office approves.  She stated that she spoke with Executive Associate Dean Weissinger about the issue and Weissinger pointed out that a W is not a grade and that giving a W is not within the purview of the faculty; it is an administrative function.  Beck stated that technically Graduate Studies may be able to change a grade but it is a bad policy not to communicate with the faculty member.   She pointed out that the interpretation by many faculty members is that the Graduate College would be taking away the purview of the faculty by making a unilateral decision about this change. 

Flowers noted that at the undergraduate level there is a process that students must go through in order to get a W.  He suggested that there might need to be a process for graduate students as well. 

Moeller stated that she could send a letter to Weissinger asking for her to communicate with the faculty members involved in similar situations.  Ledder noted that it is a matter of courtesy to be in communication with the faculty member.  Alloway pointed out that it seems odd that a situation involving a class structure would not involve input from the faculty member. 

Prochaska-Cue stated that the faculty members are concerned that without any criteria the decisions may not be evenly applied.  Flowers noted that in cases of academic dishonesty it is possible for a student to withdraw from a course before action can be taken against the student.  Ledder stated that it is incumbent on the person making the decision to get input on why the student might be withdrawing from the course.

The Committee agreed that Moeller should write a letter to Weissinger and copy the letter to the chair of the department, the faculty members involved, Prochaska-Cue, and Vice Chancellor Paul who, Vice Chancellor of Research and Dean of Graduate Studies.

            5.3       Accreditation Chapter 5

The Committee felt that the chapter does not flow properly and the graphs used in the chapter are difficult to interpret.  The focus of the chapter is to demonstrate the competency of the campus to fulfill its mission according to the resources available, yet this is not clearly and directly addressed.  There is a lengthy list of events, activities and accomplishments, but there is a lack of demonstration as regards to how this will be integrated in order to fulfill the mission of the university.

Moeller stated that she will send the Committee’s comments to Professor O’Hanlon who is chairing the accreditation efforts. 

5.4       Faculty Club

Moeller stated that she has received several email messages from professors who would like to have a place where faculty members can go to discuss work and to socialize with their colleagues.  She noted that a number of years ago there was a faculty club at the Lincoln University Club.  Beck pointed out that in the Wick Center plans a faculty club was to have been included in the lower level but somehow the agreement was dropped.

Stock noted that it is a good idea to have a faculty club but finding a place to have one is a problem.  He stated that belonging to the Lincoln University Club was expensive. 

Flowers stated that universities that have a place of tradition for their faculty club usually have good attendance but a lot of younger faculty members have a very different approach to work.  He noted that younger faculty members seem to have more allegiance to individual responsibilities and having to work 60 or more hours a week to get tenure leaves little room for socializing. 

Moeller suggested that there might be a place in the new Culture Center. 

Beck noted that there is a new hospitality program starting on campus.  She suggested that forming a faculty club could be linked to the program.  She stated that the faculty club at the University of Delaware has a gourmet restaurant that is run by students. 

Flowers suggested conducting a quick survey of the faculty to see what the interest is.  Stock stated that it would be worth exploring.  He noted that years ago the English department used to have a table at the faculty club but there is now a change of atmosphere on campus and people stay in their office working or communicating on their computers. 

Moeller stated that the Committee can discuss the issue with the Chancellor at their next meeting with him.

5.5       Committee Assignments

The Committee worked on selecting faculty members to serve on the various Senate and campus committees.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:09 p.m.  The next meeting of the Executive Committee will be on Wednesday, July 12, 2006 at 2:30 pm.  The meeting will be held in the Academic Senate Office, 420 University Terrace.  The minutes are respectfully submitted by Karen Griffin, Coordinator and Rick Alloway, Secretary.