[Approved January 11, 2007]

Minutes of the Executive Committee of the Academic Senate

January 4, 2007

St. Mary’s 113 B; 12:00 AM

 

Present:  D. Biers (presiding), D. Courte, G. DeMarco, P. Johnson, M. Lofton, W. Luckett, M. Morton,  J.O’Gorman, R. Penno, F. Pestello, A. Seielstad, R. Wells

 

J. Farrelly (Faculty Board)

 

Roll Call:  

All of the twelve members of the Committee were present.

 

Prayer:

D. Biers opened the meeting with a prayer of thanksgiving.

 

Approval of Minutes:

December 4, 2006 approved.

 

Announcements:

 

  • A revised schedule for the meetings of the Executive Committee has been distributed.  The Committee will meet on April 5 only if necessary.
  • J. Untener will meet with the Executive Committee next week to discuss the Higher Learning Commission (formerly North Central Association) review process.
  • T. Eggemeier will probably meet with the Executive Committee the following week to discuss the Graduate School strategic plan and graduate education.
  • R. Penno is on sabbatical this term but will continue to serve as Vice-President of the Academic Senate and attend Executive Committee meetings.

 

Old Business:

 

The issues list is in process of being updated and will provide the structure for committee reports in the future. This information will be posted in the Quickplace site and on the Senate webpage.

 

The following reports were received:

 

  • J. O’Gorman reported for the Academic Policies Committee.  D. Darrow is now the Chairperson of the Committee.  The Committee has developed a fourth draft of the proposal for working groups in response to the Habits of Inquiry document.  The committee was asked to distribute this to the Executive Committee for its next meeting.
  • D. Biers reported for the Faculty Affairs Committee.  The subcommittee working on “University Committee to Review Policies and Procedures for Promotion and Tenure” has completed a further draft which will be reviewed by the Committee next week.  A number of issues remain including: (1) whether a separate action by the Academic Senate is needed to combine promotion to Associate Professor with tenure; (2) the composition of the proposed committee; (3) the preliminary tenure year; (4) consultation with the legal office on the specific recommendations.  A procedure for vetting the document also needs to be determined.  The Executive Committee favors maximum faculty input before a vote of the Academic Senate. The January faculty meeting is one opportunity to request response.  Providing an opportunity for faculty to submit individual written responses was also suggested.  The Faculty Affairs Committee will begin work on post-tenure review soon.
  • D. Courte and W. Luckett reported for the Student Academic Policies Committee. They are making good progress on an honor code.
  • R. Penno reported on the status of the work he is doing on the University committees.  He has made progress in compiling the list of committees and has divided the committees into three groups.  He has information current as of March 6, 2006 on some committees, he has gathered information that he believes to be current on others, and has names of committees without current information for some others.  He plans to meet with the Provost to review this information and will then bring it to the Executive Committee.  He recommends that in addition to a committee to facilitate appointments, there should be an administrative assistant in the Provost Office charged with keeping these lists updated.
  • D. Biers noted that minutes for the November 14, 2006, meeting of the Provost Council are now available to the Executive Committee. These minutes contain information about the Honors and Scholars Program that the Executive Committee may want to follow up on in the future.

 

New Business:

 

  • The Provost has submitted a report, “Evaluating Faculty Teaching for the Purpose of Tenure, Promotion, and Merit”  developed by the Foundational Issue Committee that was charged with working on this issue.  After discussion, the Executive Committee decided to assign this issue to all three standing committees and to assign lead responsibility to the Faculty Affairs Committee, noting that this issue may need to be aligned with the issue of post-tenure review.           

 

Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 12:53 AM.

 

Respectfully Submitted,

 

Patricia A. Johnson, Secretary