Present: R. Osgood, J. Swartz, B. Grey, D. Kaiser, J. Mohan, J. Mutti, B.Voyles.

The meeting came to order at 4:15 p.m. in the Nollen House Conference Room. The minutes and excerpts of 11/14/01 were approved.

President's Remarks

The President distributed an article from the November 20 edition of the Washington Post which discusses the continuing weakness in the sciences of 12th grade students in the United States.

He asked that a discussion of the capital needs of faculty house be included as an agenda item for some future Council meeting.

Dean's Remarks

There was discussion of the Political Science Department proposal to make a diversity appointment.

J. Mohan asked for the procedure that Council members follow with regard to interviewing departmental candidates. He was told that the interviewing Council member will wait until all interviews have been accomplished and then send comments on all of the candidates to the department chair and copies Council.

The Dean noted that the Committee for Support of Faculty Scholarship has recommended study leaves to the President and that he has approved the recommendations.

The Dean distributed a proposal from the English Department for the conversion of CSMP postdoctoral fellowship into a diversity tenure-track position in eighteenth century British literature. He stated that this proposal will be discussed at the next Council meeting.

The Dean distributed a bound copy of a proposed set of documents representing essential background information which should be read by the faculty prior to their engagement in the academic planning process. He asked for Council feedback regarding its contents.

The Dean noted that Curriculum Committee had met on 11/20 to discuss the Mentored Advanced Project program in order to identify core questions that would be helpful in getting input from the faculty as part of the assessment process. The Division Chairs will meet with their Curriculum Committee representatives and the student divisional representatives in the next week or so.

B. Grey noted and reaffirmed the Dean's request for absolute confidentiality by members of Council with regard to discussions that take place in Council.

Discussion of the Planning Process

B. Grey asked if Council members think that an extended session in December would be productive given that data from the second survey of the faculty will not yet then be available. If so, what could be accomplished. The President suggested that it is premature to hold a full Saturday session without these data. B. Grey discussed the unfinished business summarized by Ray Haas at the end of his consultation in November. There was some discussion of one of those items-the planning timeframe. B. Grey noted that many of the decisions that we will be making in the short-run will be affecting other decisions in the long-run because they command significant future resources. D. Kaiser noted that Council's planning discussions have centered around budgetary impact. He stated that he would like to find a mechanism that would engage the faculty around issues of the long-term health of the institution. The President wondered why the focus of major academic discussion seemed to center on slots. He suggested that because there is no core curriculum that is shared by all, discussions necessarily focus on curricular needs of departments. B. Grey suggested Council meet December 12 for an extended dinner meeting to continue discussions begun here.

Discussion of Faculty Salary Policy

The Dean stated that he has heard complaints about how incredibly time consuming the current procedures for setting faculty salaries each year. Additionally, there seems to be no common understanding of the criteria and there application, and department chairs are overly burdened by this process. While he is supportive of the peer review process, he believes that the process must change to address these issues.

J. Mutti stated that we might acknowledge what processes are practiced by our peer institutions, which is that the Dean and the President make those decisions on faculty salary increases. He is especially sympathetic to the argument that doing this otherwise is a tremendous investment of time. He asked how the budget committee could be fully informed to make these judgments without such a significant investment. He stated that if we can't make this process far more efficient then we might as well adopt the process practiced by our peers. B. Voyles suggested that Council not focus on salary policy and begin focusing on long-term faculty development. He stated that by focusing on performance one year at a time, we are not encouraging long-term growth. Dan noted that when he took his appointment as a faculty member there was a much simpler system in place which subsequently changed when the Board of Trustees wanted to see more feathering on the issue of merit which made the process more complex by making it more empirical. He also noted that while the department chairs are asked to do a great deal of work in this process they are stripped of authority in terms of actually allocating money.

The President noted that there is something very important which is missing from our process and that is there is no one playing the central mentoring role…someone that sits down with every faculty member on a periodic basis and looks at performance and the future with that person in a trusting way that will not be seen as immediately translating into an impact on salary. He proposed that the Dean should be this person who does the performance assessment work needed to go to the Budget Committee with a proposal for them to react to. He also stated that he is not pleased with the current situation where a promotion to tenure is not significantly rewarded. He believes that these are core institutional issues that need resolution as soon as possible. B. Grey summed up by stating that this discussion is revealing agreement that this is a deeply flawed system. B. Voyles noted that teaching is not considered in the decision. B. Grey urged Council to consider a salary system that promotes the development and encouragement of good teaching and scholarship. The President left the meeting at 6:05 p.m.

B. Voyles referred to a memorandum to the departments from the Budget Steering Committee dated 11/6 in stating that he has been the recipient of a great deal of kvetching by department chairs in the science division. They regard their budgets as the core of the institution and believe that if cuts need to be made they should be made to ancillary programs. He urged discussion of this memo by Council. D. Kaiser stated that in the process of long-range planning every budget should be on the table. B. Grey responded that this memorandum was addressed to the entire college community, not just academic departments. B. Voyles stated that he did not mean to disrupt Council's current discussion, but he does believe that the faculty needs to continue this discussion to overcome the frustration they currently feel. D. Kaiser strongly suggested that until we can sort out priorities in the academic program there should be not new buildings built. B. Grey stated that moving through the master plan is a priority of the President and the Trustees.

The meeting adjourned at 6:25 p.m.

Secretary
Karen Wiese