Minutes for February 13, 2004
4 PM Faculty Center
||Greg Thorson (Chair), Bert Ahern, Carol Marxen, Siobhan Bremer, and Derrek Brunsberg
Thorson called the meeting to order at 1:00 PM. Thorson said that today's discussion would include the feedback received from the Divisions on the Faculty Affairs Committee proposal, as well as the response received from Chancellor Schuman. He noted that they have met with Science & Math, Social Sciences, and Education Divisions; and a meeting is scheduled next week with the Humanities Division to discuss the Faculty Affairs proposal. He said that feedback received raised significant issues. Thorson said that the proposal must be submitted to the Executive Board by February 18th to be included on the agenda for the next CampusAssembly meeting.
Thorson asked for reactions to Chancellor Schuman's concerns in his response to the Faculty Affairs Committee proposal. Discussion followed.
A few points made in the discussion included:
- Be clearer on rational in the extent that we are not duplicating or shifting powers.
- The Faculty Affairs Committee can provide a new faculty perspective.
- The Faculty Affairs committee is not taking away power from one committee, but adding our voice.
The committee reviewed how the Faculty Affairs Committee proposal would be presented to the Executive Board. Members discussed whether it should be presented with a rationale or to present arguments on the floor? One member said that the rationale should be more general, to explore the questions that were presented to the FDC, and identifies areas that need to be addressed. Thorson said that visiting with each Division has been a wonderful approach to the Faculty Affairs Committee proposal. Thorson said that he would make some language changes to the Faculty Affair Committee proposal and forward it by e-mail to committee members for approval by Monday or Tuesday of next week.
Some of the concerns raised in the forums about the Faculty Affairs Committee included:
Need - Overlapping, is it already handled, should we take it on?
Composition of Committee - Questioned why there is no P & A? It was suggested that the committee should also include student/staff representation.
Selection of Committee - should it be elected or selected by the Executive Committee?
Term - What is the length of office?
After discussion, it was agreed that the Faculty Affairs Committee would include 7 members, and would include:
- 4 faculty, one from each Division
- 1 P & A [elected by the academic staff]
- 1 Student [elected by students]
- the UMM faculty member on the Senate Committee on Faculty Affairs
Members discussed and voiced concerns on the term of appointment, whether it should be an elected or selected position? It was agreed that we should go forward with the Faculty Affairs Committee as a 2-year term elected position. Thorson said that they will meet with the Humanities Division next week, and a new proposal will be drafted.
Faculty Enrichment Program
Ahern said that there are two necessary changes to the Faculty Enrichment Program, having to do with the timetable and the ending of the IT Mentoring Program. The memo will be revised and sent by e-mail for approval. When approved, the FEP application will be sent out.
Meeting adjourned at 2:00 PM.