EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Present: Bryant, DiMagno, Prochaska-Cue, Sawyer, Whitt, Wolf
Absent: Fuller, King, Logan-Peters, Miller, Scheideler, Siekman, Spann
Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2002
Location: 420 University Terrace, Academic Senate Office
1.0 Call to Order
Bryant called the meeting to order at 3:07 p.m.
2.0 Announcements
2.1 Take a Parent to Lunch Invitation
Bryant reported that members of the Executive Committee have been invited to take a parent to lunch during new student enrollment. He suggested that anyone interested contact him.
2.2 Doctoral Hooding Ceremony
Bryant announced that the doctoral hooding ceremony is scheduled for May 10th. He recommended that those interested in attending should contact the bookstore to order their gowns.
2.3 Campus Visit of David Ricketts
Bryant reported that David Ricketts, Director of Parking and Transportation at the University of Iowa, will be visiting the campus to speak with the Parking Advisory Committee on April 11th. Bryant stated that he will ask Professor Hampton, Chair of the Parking Advisory Committee, to schedule a session for members of that committee and the Executive Committee to hear Ricketts speak.
2.4 Head Count of Faculty on Campus
Bryant distributed information on the number of tenure and tenure track faculty from 1989 through the present. The committee noted that for the last three years the number of tenured/tenure track faculty members have decreased. Wolf asked if there was information regarding the number of students enrolled during this time period. DiMagno pointed out that there will be an additional significant decrease next year because of the extremely low level of faculty hiring this year. Wolf noted that the decrease in faculty is troublesome given the emphasis on recruiting and retaining students. DiMagno stated that information on part time faculty and instructors for the same period of time should be examined. Bryant stated that this information would be helpful and that he would try to get it.
2.5 New Schedule of Classes Catalog
Bryant reported that he has received complaints about the picture of the new baseball diamond on the schedule of classes catalog. He noted that people are asking why an athletic field is being portrayed on the cover of a catalog dealing with academics.
3.0 Charity Martin, Chair of Honors Convocation Committee
3.1 Changes to the Honors Convocation Ceremony
Martin reported that the administration wanted to change the Honors Convocation ceremony because it felt that students were not getting the recognition intended by the event. She noted that the administration also wanted the ceremony moved out of the coliseum. She reported that the ceremony has been divided into two sections this year. On April 12th beginning at 3:30, Rising Scholars will be recognized. These are first year students with a 3.6 gpa and above and sophomore students with a 4.0 gpa. Those students with a 4.0 gpa will be individually recognized and they will be handed a red Convocation folder by the Chancellor. Martin noted that those students with a gpa of 3.6 and above will be recognized as a group. After the students have been recognized, the Chancellor will announce the College Distinguished Teaching Awards and Service Awards.
Martin reported that recognition of University Scholars will be conducted on April 13th at the Lied Center. She noted that Chancellors Scholars, Superior Scholars, and 4.0 senior and junior High Scholars will be recognized at this ceremony. She stated that the OTICA, ORCA, and Teaching Academy awards to faculty will be conducted after the students are recognized. Martin noted that each college is being requested to host recognition ceremonies for sophomores, juniors, and seniors with a gpa of 3.6-3.99.
Bryant asked if one of the reasons for these changes is due to increase in size of the Honors Convocation ceremony. Martin stated that this was correct and that the desire to move the ceremony to the Lied Center has been influential in making the changes. She pointed out that the committee is reviewing the overall requirements for being recognized. She noted that some colleges have nearly 1/3 of their students being recognized. Wolf asked if there was an increase in the cost of the ceremonies because of the change. Martin stated that she was unsure of any additional costs. She pointed out that administration is still covering the costs of creating the convocation certificates. Wolf stated that forcing the colleges to host recognition ceremonies was an additional cost burden which is particularly difficult given the current budget situation.
Sawyer pointed out that the ceremony is good public relations for the university. He asked if parents are notified of their childs accomplishments and the ceremony. Martin stated that letters are sent out to all parents. Wolf stated that the timing of the ceremonies does not reflect the lifestyles of todays students who often work 20 30 hours per week and who cannot attend the ceremony due to a conflict with work. He noted that many of the colleges have not determined when and where their ceremony will be held.
Martin noted that in the past a good portion of the ceremony was spent on faculty awards. She noted that many students were not returning to the ceremony because the majority of the event was spent on faculty awards rather than student awards. She stated that the faculty awards will now be split up between the Honors Convocations ceremonies and the State of the University address. DiMagno suggested that faculty awards should not be distributed at the Honors Convocation ceremony for students, but instead they should be distributed in front of other faculty. He noted that a few faculty award winners could speak to the students at the Honors Convocation ceremony. Bryant pointed out that at many institutions, faculty awards are handled by the Academic Senate.
Martin stated that the committee plans on discussing grade inflation. She pointed out that the number of students receiving recognition for honors has grown significantly over the past several years. DiMagno suggested that a way to prevent this from occurring would be to normalize grades. Martin stated that the committee is considering using ranking in the college rather than gpa to determine honors. DiMagno noted that this would be difficult to do in large colleges. Martin stated that the committee will be looking at the standards used to determine honors standing. She noted that changes might be made next year regarding these standards.
Wolf stated that it will be difficult for colleges to schedule their recognition ceremony, particularly if many of the colleges attempt to hold the ceremony at the same time and are competing for venues. Martin stated that the committee is not anticipating colleges to have their recognition ceremony scheduled at the same time as the Honors Convocation ceremony. She stated that the certificates will still be handled by administration and that the college will not have to absorb this cost. DiMagno pointed out that the doctoral hooding ceremony is a good ceremony that should be continued.
4.0 Approval of 2/27/02Minutes
The approval of the minutes was postponed due to the lack of a quorum.
5.0 Salary Proposal New Way to Allocate Salary Raises
Wolf stated that he was greatly disturbed to learn that the administrators of a university that is touted to be a great research institution could make a miscalculation with the salary increases, especially during these times of budget cutting. He stated that the Chancellor should have apologized at the Senate meeting on this error. Bryant stated that the Executive Committee will ask the Chancellor to elaborate on the miscalculation when they next meet with him. Wolf stated that he is now very concerned with the amount of salary increase that will be left for faculty once the Vice Chancellors and Deans take their cut of the increase. Bryant pointed out that the faculty needs to ask for more funding for an increase. He reported that he received a proposal to structure the increase differently than in the past. He noted that the proposal would make salary increases more equitable. He pointed out that the proposal calls for higher paid faculty to receive less of a percentage increase, although they would receive more in money than lower paid faculty who would receive less actual money but a higher percentage of increase. Bryant suggested that the committee might want to propose this new structure to the Faculty Compensation Advisory Committee.
Wolf asked how other institutions handle faculty raises. DiMagno stated that typically the decisions are normally made within the department at other institutions. Whitt noted that in his department faculty are awarded points for teaching, service, or research. He stated that each point is worth so much money. He pointed out that this system allows everyone in the department to be evaluated on the same basis.
DiMagno pointed out that the proposed system is arbitrary. Whitt stated that it could lead to salary compression and Bryant noted that it does not take into account the performance of a faculty member. Sawyer suggested that the FCAC look at a variety of different methods to determine faculty salary increases. DiMagno pointed out that departments need to have greater control over salary increases. He noted that this is a faculty governance issue, and that there are several effective methods by which reallocation may be carried out by the administration; the additional tool of annual salary increases is not needed. The committee discussed the problems associated with keeping the raises strictly within the department. Bryant suggested that the committee should take a position regarding department chairs and how long they should be able to hold this position. He stated that the committee should discuss this issue with Chancellor Perlman.
6.0 Unfinished Business
6.1 NCAA Interim Report
Bryant reported that the campus is required by the NCAA to provide an interim report on the progress being made on recommendations made by the NCAA Committee on Athletics Certification. He distributed a copy of the report to the committee. Bryant noted that a faculty member of the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee has concerns with the report. This faculty member has asked that the Gender Subcommittee of the IAC be activated to review the formal report made by Lamarr Daniels, the outside consultant hired by the Athletics Department to investigate the departments practices in regards to gender equity issues. The committee agreed that Bryant should meet with the chair of IAC and the faculty member to see if they can get the subcommittee activated.
6.2 Evaluation of Administrators
Sawyer reported that the subcommittee to work on the evaluation of administrators would be meeting next week and would report back to the committee at the next meeting. Sawyer stated that the subcommittee would be reviewing instruments used at other institutions. DiMagno suggested that the Senate could collect evaluations on administrators at the Dean level or above and publish excerpts each year. He proposed that the findings of the evaluations should be made available to the administrators. Bryant pointed out that there is no correlation between administrators and low enrollment in their colleges. Sawyer pointed out that this is one of the reasons why it is important to establish independent evaluations of administrators.
6.3 Nominations to the Executive Committee
The committee discussed potential candidates to run for election in April for Executive Committee membership.
7.0 New Business
There was no new business to discuss.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:40 p.m. The next meeting of the Executive Committee will be held on Wednesday, March 13th at 3:00 p.m., in the Academic Senate Office, 420 University Terrace. The minutes are respectfully submitted by Karen Griffin, Coordinator, and James King Secretary.
