[Approved September 11, 2006]

Minutes of the Executive Committee of the Academic Senate

August 28, 2006

St. Mary’s 113 B; 10:00 AM

Present: J. Biddle, D. Biers (presiding), D. Courte, P. Johnson, W. Luckett, M. Morton, R. Penno, A Seielstad, R. Wells

J. Farrelly (Faculty Board)

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

Prayer; D. Biers opened the meeting with a prayer from the neo-Confucian philosophers.

Approval of Minutes:

August 21, 2006 approved

Old Business:

1. Committee appointments:

· Calendar Committee: Peter Hovey, Ron Burrows; Elizabeth Gustafson will serve as chairperson until January

· Committee on General Education and Competencies: Michael Geary; two students still need to be appointed.

2. Academic Senate; Pam Thimmes has resigned. A replacement will be identified. A graduate student still needs to be appointed.

3. Standing Committees are working on developing meeting schedules.

4. The Executive Committee will schedule meetings with the following:

· The three chairpersons of the Provost ad hoc committees on promotion and tenure, post-tenure review, and faculty evaluation. D. Biers will communicate the need to align these documents and to place them in a framework of the profession. R. Wells, J. Biddle, and P. Johnson will develop a statement to guide the inter-relating of these documents in the context of the academic profession.

· K. Henderson will be invited to discuss the relationship of her new position to the work of the Academic Senate.

· T. Eggemeier has requested to review the strategic plan of the Graduate School with the committee.

New Business:

1. The letter and ballot for the faculty vote on DOC 06-05 were reviewed. P. Johnson will make revision and distribute to all members for any final suggestions.

2. While the document from the Marianist Working Group has not yet been officially received, the Committee discussed how to handle it when it is forwarded by the Provost with a charge. M. Morton indicated that she would suggest that the framework of the document be separated from the recommendations and treated as a statement about the University’s philosophy concerning undergraduate education. Any specific recommendations would be considered independently through normal Senate processes. She would like the Academic Senate to consider endorsing, not approving, the framework portion of the document. P. Johnson asked what the intention of this action would be. Would this be placed in the undergraduate Bulletin? Would this be used by some or all units as guidelines for curriculum development? These questions would need to be addressed once the document is assigned to a specific standing committee of committees. R. Penno suggested that the document be assigned to all three standing committees.

3. It was noted that the issues lists need to be begun for the academic year.

4. D. Biers will set the agenda for the first meeting of the Academic Senate and distribute that with the minutes of the last meeting. This needs to be done a week in advance of the meeting. There will be time on the agenda for open discussion of the proposed Constitutional changes. There will also be time for organizational meetings of the standing committees.

Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 11:30 AM.

Respectfully Submitted,

Patricia A. Johnson, Secretary