[Approved February 3, 2006]

Minutes of the Executive Committee of the Academic Senate

January 27, 2006

St. Mary’s 113 B;  1:30 PM

 

 

Present:  J. Biddle, D.Biers (presiding), D. Courte, D. Gudaitis, S. Hileman,  P. Johnson, M. Morton, R. Penno, R. Wells.

 

Excused: J. O’Gorman, F. Pestello, A. Seielstad,

 

Opening Prayer:  The opening prayer was offered by Dave Biers.

 

Roll Call:    Nine of the twelve members of the Committee were present.

 

Approval of Minutes:

            November 29, 2005, not available

            December 6, 2005, not available

            December 13, 2005, not available

January 20, 2006:  Minutes were approved with clarification changes to the section of the minutes that records agenda items for the full Academic Senate meetings.  This section of the minutes will indicate the month proposed for agenda items.

 

Announcements:

There were no announcements.

 

Old Business:

1.      Meeting Schedule: The meeting schedule for ECAS members for winter 2006 has been finalized and distributed to all members.

 

2.      Review of President Curran: Dave Biers has reviewed the tapes of the Senate discussion and compiled a list of issues to be included in the report for the Board of Trustees.  He will have a written draft of the report out to members on Monday, January 30, for review and revision.  The letter needs to be sent by February 2.

 

3.      Provost Committee Lists:  Dave Biers distributed the Fall 2005 document from the Provost Council on “Foundational Issues.”  There are eleven working groups identified in that document.  ECAS reviewed the groups, identifying ECAS representation.

a.       Catholic and Marianist Mission and Identity (Mary Morton, Jim Biddle)

b.      Department Finances – Summer Returns (This may need a representative from ECAS.)

c.       Faculty Grants and Sponsored Research (Mary Morton)

d.      Evaluation of Faculty Teaching (Dave Biers)

e.       International Strategy (Mary Morton)

f.        Post-Tenure Review (Rebecca Wells)

g.       Teaching Loads, Workload, and Faculty Mix (Dave Biers, Mary Morton)

h.       University-Wide Tenure and Promotion Policy Process (Jim Biddle)

i.         Academic Identity (Jack O’Gorman)

It was noted that the work of a number of these groups will need to come to the Academic Senate.  It is important to have open and timely communication between ECAS and these groups, especially on the issues that will become the work of the Academic Senate.

 

4.      Logistical Issues for the Functioning of the Senate: Pat Johnson asked for approval of the process for posting minutes to the Senate web-site.  ECAS agreed that sub-committee minutes will be posted when they are approved.  Sub-committees are asked to approve minutes in a timely manner.  Minutes of the full Academic Senate will be posted in unapproved form and replaced by approved minutes immediately after the meeting at which they are approved.  If there are significant changes these will be identified in bold in the approved minutes as well as in the minutes of the meeting at which they are approved.

 

5.      North Central Review Committee:  Rebecca Wells will take the lead on developing a response for the North Central Review Committee about the functioning and effectiveness of the Academic Senate.

 

 

New Business

 

Committee Reports

a.       Academic Policies Committee of the Academic Senate: Jim Biddle reported for APCAS. Unapproved minutes of the  January 23, 2006 meeting were distributed to the members of ECAS. 

                                                                           i.      The committee is discussing the role of APCAS in leading/initiating academic policies.   They are looking at the oversight responsibilities of the committee (Committee on General Education and Competencies and the Calendar Committee) and how best to carry out those responsibilities while also initiating discussion and work on issues of importance to the academic agenda of the University.  In some instances the responsibility for oversight is not clear.  The Stander Symposium Committee was used as an example of the issues being raised.  What is its relationship to the Academic Senate? Should it at least be providing and annual report?  This example resulted in a lengthy discussion by the Executive Committee.  What is the relationship of the Academic Senate to standing committees and to ad hoc committees?  How can the Academic Senate function to provide a better flow of information between these groups and with faculty?  How can the Academic Senate best provide faculty, as well as the Senate itself, with a forum for initiating and influencing academic policies?  How do we increase faculty involvement and engagement in these processes?  This discussion will resume at the next meeting when the Provost will be in attendance.

                                                                         ii.      Course Withdrawal Policy:  The committee will meet February 6, 2006 with this as its main agenda item.  They hope to bring forward a recommendation out of that meeting.

                                                                        iii.      Class Scheduling and Classroom Analysis:  With the increase in pedagogy that connects different classes and makes use of block scheduling, that makes use of a wide-range of class sizes, and that uses a wide range of classroom configurations, there is a need to address this complex issue.  The committee will be working with Associate Provost Bickford and the classroom analysis in their discussion of how best to identify those who should be part of the discussion and what should be included in the discussion.

                                                                       iv.      Calendar Committee Recommendations:  The committee has a request from the Calendar Committee regarding study days and start days for final examinations.

 

b.      Faculty Affairs Committee of the Academic Senate:  Dave Biers reported for FACAS.  Unapproved minutes of the January 18, 2006 meeting were distributed to the members of ECAS.  The committee also met on January 25, 2006. The committee is currently working on three issues:

                                                                           i.      Faculty background checks: The committee has requested a copy of the revised proposed policy.  They have also requested a meeting with Troy Washington to discuss changes in the document in response to the Academic Senate discussion.  In addition, questions have been raised about checks for international faculty hires and about the process for such checks.  Dave Biers informed ECAS that Associate Provost Untener has indicated that the University will move forward on implementing a background check process.  ECAS recommended that the Faculty Affairs Committee still hold the proposed conversations.  These consultations should help avoid complications in the implementation of a process by raising questions about and promoting reflection on issues before they occur.

                                                                         ii.      Timing of faculty elections for the Academic Senate: The committee requests time at the February 10 meeting of the Academic Senate for a discussion of the sense of the Senate regarding changing faculty terms to follow the academic year rather than the calendar year.  The change to the current process was made because of Senate involvement in the budget process.  That involvement no longer seems to be fundamental to the work of the Senate.  The committee would like to discuss three questions:  Should this change be made?  If so, should current terms be extended or reduced to accommodate the change?  If so, should the new Senate take effect immediately after the final meeting of the Academic Senate in the academic year (normally late April)?  This would require a Spring meeting for the election of the Executive Committee and officers.  The new Executive Committee would then be in place over the Summer.

                                                                        iii.      Issues regarding the Constitution and processes of the Academic Senate:  The committee is reviewing a request from Jim Farrelly concerning the processes and Constitution of the Academic Senate.  This will be the focus of their meeting on February 8, 2006.

 

c.       Student Academic Policies Committee of the Academic Senate:  Steve Hileman reported for SAPCAS.  The Committee will meet on Tuesday, January 31, 2006.  The main agenda item will be the Honor Statement.

 

 

Setting the Agenda for the Full Senate Meetings:

Approval of Committee Membership (ECAS)(February)

Discussion of the suggestion to move the elections and beginning of terms of office of faculty representatives to the Academic Senate (FACAS) (February)

Report from the working group on issues of Marianist Education (College of A&S-Benson) (March)

 

Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 2:45 PM.

 

Respectfully Submitted,

 

Patricia A. Johnson

Secretary