University of Minnesota Morris


UMM Home > Committees > Faculty Affairs > Minutes > 03-29-06

Faculty Affairs Committee Minutes (03-29-06)



Stacey parker-Aronson (Chair), Janet Schrunk Ericksen, Bart Finzel, Keith Brugger, Pam Solvie and Tom Mahoney


Argie Manolis

FAC Minutes 3/29/06
Stacey called the meeting to order at 9:03 a.m.

corrections or changes in minutes

No changes or corrections were given; minutes from Wednesday, March 15, 2006 were received as information.

Feed back from Engin's meeting with the FAC

Stacey sent Engin a letter and asked him to continue with the survey, and take into consideration the concerns expressed by this committee. Engin has responded to Stacey regarding the website he is creating for the Faculty Affairs Committee.

Stacey distributed the draft of the Policy on Exit interviews

A member mentioned that a real issue is how far to go with the procedural part of the project- we have capable directors to handle this in the Human Resource office.   Human resource is responsible for the procedure to happen.   Sarah is working with P & A issues, and all exiting employees will be given the opportunity to complete one.

The completion rate is low, is 50 a low number for completion since 2001?   Should the number (50) be struck from this statement?

A member asked if this policy should be acknowledged publicly-the Faculty Affairs committee is working on this and so is Sarah Mattson in Human Resources.   We could ask for an endorsement from the Campus Assembly meeting on April 4, then send on to the last CA meeting.

A member had a statement that should be added or changed (Stacey will get the wording from Bart)

Faculty Affairs committee short survey

Keith confirmed that he will produce the survey.   A member inquired about the survey coming from Engin and the Faculty center covering the same concerns and topics that ours is.   There are "4" questions on the short survey all regarding research, scholarly and/or creative activities.   For the last question it was suggested by a member that there be a space for weaknesses and strengths indicated, so that it is known that the survey is used to record both.  

Should opportunities, that are available for faculty, be listed?   A member mentioned undergraduate research-work with students and if there are no results, it is wasted time.   Funding such as the McKnight award is not available in Sciences, a member said it would be helpful to know what the faculty are aware of in regards to research support.   A member noted that we are fortunate to be tied to the Twin Cities campus and are able to get Grant in aid, most of the strengths come not from the UMM campus but the larger campus (TC).

A member commented on the way the results will be quantified, another member said his expectation of the results will show that faculty members are spending a lot of time and money (out of pocket) during their summers.   The survey should indicate the amount of support both physical and monetary.

The results should be shared with the division chairs so they are aware of the salary impact on where and what faculty are doing their work.   The results should be shared with the Dean, also.

A member stated that the faculty Affairs committee should be one of the committees the Dean candidates meet with, so that Faculty concerns can be presented, the information from this survey will be helpful for this purpose.  

The concerns are consistent with exit interviews in regards to funneling of information.   The results should be shared in a focused summary fashion.   The issue of how many faculty members share our concerns will be settled.   Members felt there should be a preface letter, using email attachment to send it out to the faculty.   It was brought up that there should be (2) indicators added, such as Division or unit they were hired under and years of service.

Keith will gather the results; he hopes to get the results of the survey before finals begin.   A member added that the faculty should be made aware that the survey is coming from the Faculty Affairs Committee.

The draft for Strategic Planning

It is 95% along and will go out yet again; there will be time for people to address their concerns.

The regular alignment of faculty and staff in regard to student size was discussed

They have tried to give equal weight to different concerns, and so have been somewhat vague in the wording, so as not to tie anyone's hands in areas of suggestions.

There has been some concern shown as the numbers of faculty and staff grows, and student numbers are lessening.

The students' initiatives are more detailed:

Students research sources are listed while the faculty were very vague, it was mentioned that a report was not received from faculty to use

A member said he would strongly encourage students to go to Geological Society

Civil Service and the Bargaining unit staff-specific issues with staff these were separate in the initial discussion but have now been rolled into one-due to space limitation.

The concern that staff concerns were not taken into consideration, was expressed.

A suggestion was made to send a couple of sentences in reference to the section on staff and faculty.

A member asked what do people envision in this statement?

In the existing statement on Sabbatical programs, a member suggested we change the "maintain" strong sabbatical program to "improve" sabbatical program

It was noticed that some things have been moved around and combined with other issues in this version of the report.   Andy will send out an email when the latest draft is available to read.

It was decided to meet as a Faculty Affairs Committee on Friday, March 31 to make recommendations to Andy and the Strategic Planning Committee.  

Schedule conflict concerns

A member brought up a concern about scheduling conflicts with its members, one of the members of the Committee has not attended for a while, should we look at rescheduling our meetings so all can attend?

Chancellor candidate presentations

Janet encouraged all FAC members to attend the Chancellor Candidates' open meetings and presentations.

Meeting adjourned at 10:00 A.M.

Submitted by:
Judy Van Eps