Executive Board
Meeting Minutes
September 28, 2004 | 3:00-5:00 p.m.
107 Lab of Mechanics
Present: S. Agarwal (FS
President); B Allen (Provost); C. Baldwin (FS President-Elect); S.
Carlson (Assoc. Provost); S. Crase (FDAR Council Chair); A.M. Fiore
(Family and Consumer Sciences Caucus Chair); J. Girton (Past-President
& RPA Chair); C. Heising (Engineering Caucus Chair); D. Holger
(Assoc. Provost); J. Maves (Design Caucus Chair); G. Palermo (Academic
Affairs Council Chair); G. Phye (Education Caucus Chair); B. Robinson
(Judiciary and Appeals Council Chair); E. Thacker (Vet Med Caucus
Chair); A. Van Der Valk (Liberal Arts and Sciences Caucus Chair);
D. Vrchota (Governance Council Chair); T. Zanish-Belcher (FS Secretary);
Absent: B. Yang (Agriculture
Caucus Chair); B. Mennecke (Business Caucus Chair)
Guests: B. Dillon (Ames
Tribune); K. Saunders and M. Mendelson for ISUComm
Call to Order - 3:10 p.m.
The meeting was called
to order at 3:15 p.m.
Consent Agenda - 3:10
p.m.
Agenda
Minutes, Executive Board,
August 31, 2004
Agarwal moved that ISUComm
be moved up earlier in the agenda.
Girton moved, Crase seconded,
and the consent agenda was approved.
Old Business
A. ISU Comm Proposal
The charge for ISUComm
was to create a pilot project, assess, and report the results to the
Faculty Senate. ISUComm will extend to all undergraduates. The committee
has appeared before every college curriculum committee (more than
once, in some cases).
Palermo reported on behalf
of the Academic Affairs Council. While there were some minor revisions
for the report, it was passed unanimously by the Council. The Council
endorses the report and forwards it to the Faculty Senate for approval.
In the Council's discussions,
there were some concerns over logistics such as transfers, community
colleges, workshops, and ESL students. There were also questions about
the role of the faculty/departments.
Van der Valk questioned
whether this was a significant change. Mendelson responded that there
will be two courses with substantive changes as there will be a shift
from written communication to WOVe (integrated instruction in Written,
Oral, Verbal, Electronic communication). There will be an emphasis
on civic and cultural themes, learning communities, cluster groups,
and an electronic portfolio the students can utilize during their
career at Iowa State.
Mendelson noted that ISU
will be the first in the country to implement a program of this type.
It will be a University-wide program and will greatly enhance communication
instruction.
Van der Valk also noted
that current teaching is by beginning graduate students—are not particularly
well qualified
Mendelson responded that
based on the assessments, there were definite improvements. He also
mentioned that in the future, there will be a training focus.
Crase asked how the training
will be integrated. Mendelson said there would be a stipend offered
to attend workshops. They are inventing this, as there are no models
to depend upon.
Phye suggested a lecturer
assessment that would look at implementation of the techniques.
Agarwal asked about the
issue of integrating transfer students. Mendelson said the community
colleges are receptive to working with ISU
Agarwal commended Mendelson
for all his hard work over the past 5 years.
As the motion has come
from the Academic Affairs Council, the Executive Board approved its
forwarding to the Faculty Senate.
Announcements and Remarks
- 3:15 p.m.
President
Board of Regents meeting:
Agarwal reported on the
Board of Regents meeting he attended. The Governor spoke and focused
on education for K-12, pre-school, the efficiencies of high schools,
and the communication between schools and the different levels of
expectation. There also needs to be a focus on science and math.
The Faculty Activity Report
for ISU was discussed, and the current average is 58.2 hours. It is
self-reported, but the Board endorsed the credibility of the numbers.
The 4 year budget proposal
was discussed, and President Geoffroy will present on this topic at
the next Faculty Senate meeting.
There was also discussion
of tuition increases, faculty salary reports (fairly low when compared
to peers), and student enrollment issues.
Faculty Senate Administration:
Agarwal plans to focus
on shared governance with the various administrative offices on campus,
including new Research (currently ad hoc) and IT committees (to work
with Jim Davis, the new Chief Information Officer).
President-Elect
Baldwin reported on the
reorganizations and the work of the Task Force.
The merger of Family and
Consumer Sciences and Education is continuing. The proposal will be
out by Oct. 18 and the faculty will then vote. The task force will
then distribute a survey on the process, and the results will be available
prior on the Faculty Senate web page.
Baldwin then reported
on another issue. She was approached by a faculty member who claimed
there was a departmental merger which had been going on for 2 years.
Baldwin asked for the Executive Board's feelings on the issue. Should
we evaluate regardless of the time frame?
This is in reference to
an administrative merger between the Department of Community and Regional
Planning and Landscape Architecture (College of Design).
Phye feels this is a situation
for an ombudsperson, how should the Faculty Senate respond to this
situation, especially with they are approached by individuals.
Palermo disagreed with
the complaint of the lack of communication over this department reorganization.
The College (based on budget reversion) eliminated one chair for savings
and an assessment will be forthcoming. It was voted on by both faculties
and the college. There was a task force, hearings from the faculty
and a vote.
The Executive Board did
feel it raised a larger policy issue. How should the Faculty Senate
determine the difference between an administrative combination as
opposed to a departmental merger? Agarwal asked if this was an actual
reorganization.
Girton noted this all
related to intent. How does the Faculty Senate respond to queries?
We may need a permanent group as part of a council or committee. Task
forces may not be the best manner by which to handle these situations
and we also need a mechanism by which to obtain information.
The Executive Board then
discussed the elements of an actual reorganization, and the issue
of faculty voice. Do we respond to everyone? Palermo suggested a direct
inquiry to the Chair and the Dean. In this most recent situation (which
occurred three years ago) there are currently internal and external
review is going on. The Provost noted that it was dangerous to try
and apply policies to reorganizations prior to the existence of the
new policy.
Agarwal noted that shared
leadership does not necessarily fall under the category or reorganization.
Baldwin stated that it might happen again however and noted it did
have a change in the leadership structure and hierarchy. Occurred
temporarily, but may now be formalized.
Girton said the policy
was to foster communication between the administration and the faculty.
Provost believes there
are a number of hybrid departmental organizations with a wide spectrum
of arrangements. He thinks it is a judgment call, but there should
definitely be faculty input. There needs to be discussion ahead of
time, particularly in regards to hiring and firing, and the promotion
and tenure process.
Provost
The Provost also reported
on the Board of Regents meeting, and how the proposed budget changes
will alter how we do things. There will be internal reallocation based
on how much money from the state.
The process is being discussed
but it needs to be based on trust and we will need to have a documented
system
The reallocation (based
on the $28 million given to the Regents) is tied to enrollment and
incentives must be part of the process. Departments will not start
from a level playing field and we also need qualitative goals based
on principles. We will also need to adjust to the concept of 4 year
budget plans.
The gains will be different
for different areas. Palermo asked if certain areas would left without
funding for the 4 years based on the strategic plan. The Provost responded
that many options are still on the table.
The Executive Board then
approved the agenda for the next Faculty Senate meeting.
VII. Adjourn—5:00 p.m.
The meeting was adjourned
at 5:10 p.m.
NEXT MEETING
October 26, 2004 3:10
-5:00
107 Lab of Mechanics
