University of Minnesota Morris


UMM Home > Faculty Center > Development Committee > 01-02 Minutes > 4/9/02

Faculty Development Committee

Minutes for April 9, 2002
4 PM Faculty Center
Humanities Annex

Present: Harold Hinds (Chair), Bert Ahern, Gordon McIntosh, and Stacey Parker Aronson

Absent: Doug Reese, Mike Rea, and Cyrus Pansch

The meeting began with Ahern stating that he had meet with Schwaller to discuss the Faculty Center budget and that the budget has been approved, noting that the Fall Faculty Retreat will be fully funded.<.p>

Ahern discussed the ADT Conference, which was held on April 1 in Oyate Hall. He said it was well attended, included guests from the Crookston campus, and described the conference events. Ahern said that a web page highlighting the topic discussions would be linked from the Faculty Center Page.

Ahern noted that the NTNT Grant is likely to be renewed for another year, and, if so, that a like amount of this year, which is $12,000, will be contributed again.

Hinds said that he had received an e-mail from the Executive Committee in regards to Tom Turner's Faculty Seminar Proposal. The Faculty Seminars proposal will be placed under new business on the agenda for the next Assembly meeting.

Hinds said that the report from Schwaller indicated that the Student Opinion of Teachers web survey didn't go well, and noting that the ASL committee had received the results. He said that the ASL committee would continue to discuss the survey. Hinds discussed with the committee the suggestions made by the ASL committee for the survey. Hinds suggested that a general summary report of the first survey results should be requested from the Academic Dean, he also asked if the committee thought that they should meet again with Schwaller to discuss the SOTS.

The FDC will meet on April 30th at 4:00 PM. Ahern said the agenda would include next year's Bush Project. He said that 25 new faculty will be recruited to work with the "Gang of Five" Bush Instructional Technology team. Ahern said that the announcement - asking faculty to join the "Gang of Five" will be sent out on April 19, and that hopefully the faculty will be recruited before the end of the year. Ahern said that the new recruits would receive a faculty stipend from the Bush Grant.

Ahern said that he had talked with Richard Zeller twice as a speaker for the Fall Faculty Retreat. Copies of Zeller's revised proposal was distributed, Ahern noted that he didn't think it was changed as much as it could have been. Ahern said that Zeller is avail-able for the Fall Faculty Retreat, August 19-20, and that he would not be expensive.

Research Award
Hinds distributed the revised language for the Research Award to the committee for discussion. Hinds said that that the logical place to add the revisions for the Research Award is under the last paragraph of the Research Award, which is, titled Service on the Award Committee. He said the revised language deals with 3 issues:

  1. The first point deals with an issue that happened this year, a member of the committee had become an advocate for a case. Hinds noted that this issue had been resolved after discussion with the person.
  2. The second point - maintaining committee full compliment. The committee decided that the wording should include retirement, loss of member, or resignation.
  3. The third point deals with who will guide the committee. The committee discussed the revision; McIntosh said that he feels that the wording is unclear. The wording was changed to the faculty member who has served on the committee for the most time.

Hinds asked for a motion for the two editorial changes for the revised language of the Research Award, which would include:

  1. Retirement, loss of member, or resignation.
  2. The faculty member who has served on the committee for the most time.

McIntosh motioned to append the language, seconded by Aronson, it was unanimously approved. Hinds will forward the revised language to Pederson for revisions to the Research Award making it ready for next year.

The committee discussed the applications for the Faculty Enrichment Program and Bush Instructional Technology applications. Ahern said that it is up to the committee to approve the applications, Aronson questioned if the funding for the Faculty Enrichment Program and Instructional Technology program were lumped together. Ahern replied that it is separate funding. There were three applications for the Instructional Technology Program, and eight applications for the Faculty Enrichment Program.

The 3 applications for the Instructional Technology were first discussed. Ahern noted that there is funding for 6 faculty; currently all but one member have been identified. Hinds noted that one applicant had indicated retirement next year on the application, he questioned if this could create an issue if there was a considerable amount of competition for funding. Ahern said that there is funding available for 2 additional mentor/mentoring teams, and that he will do more recruiting. Hinds asked if there was a motion to accept the 3 applicants for the Instructional Technology Program. McIntosh moved to accept the 3 applicants, Aronson seconded the motions, it was unanimously approved.

The committee next discussed the 8 applications received for the Faculty Enrichment Program. Ahern stated that in the past funding was available for 5 mentoring partnerships, but may be able to fund additional partnerships. The committee discussed the current funding of 10 at $250/each or 5 at $500 each, or funding all 8 applicants at a reduced amount. McIntosh said that money is an addition to the mentoring experience, and that it should not be the motivating factor. Hinds said that the most valuable advantage is faculty retention, coupling a junior faculty member with a senior faculty member - how you can succeed in Morris. Hinds asked if it was the consensus of the committee to fund all 8 applicants, McIntosh and Aronson agreed. Ahern said that the amount of money should not be the deciding factor, but could be an issue if you left the amount open. The committee further discussed the applications, and felt that 2 applications were weak. Hinds said that there are two approaches to take, either to not accept the applications today, or contact the applicants and ask for a revise application due in the next two weeks. Aronson said that she feels comfortable returning the applications and asking for revisions to be considerably more specific, and that the same standard applies to all the applicants.

Aronson made a motion to approve the 8 applicants, but a request will be made to the 2 applicants singled out, for an enhancement of their applications, seconded by McIntosh, it was unanimously approved. Ahern will send out letters of acceptance to the 6, indicating the amount, indicating a revision (possibly upward) depending on the outcome of the 2 applications that were returned for revisions. Ahern said that he would be communicating with the faculty about pairing them with a mentor.

The FDC will meet on April 30, 2002; discussion of the Seminar Technology team will be included on the agenda.

The meeting was adjourned at 5:54 PM.

Respectfully submitted,

Linda Pederson