Present: S. Barber, V. Brown, L. Gregg-Jolly, M. Montgomery, R. Osgood, M. Schneider, J. Swartz, R. Vetter

The meeting came to order a 4:20 p.m. in the Nollen House Conference Room.

The minutes and excerpts of 9/24/03 and 9/24/03 were approved.

President's Remarks

The President noted that the College is giving serious consideration to acquiring a property downtown and moving the Bookstore there.

He also noted that the College will be undertaking a renovation of Herrick Chapel next summer. This work might include redoing the windows, improving ceiling acoustics, increasing the size of the chancel to make it more accommodating for choral and other performing groups, and refurbishing the organ (over a period of years).

Dean's Remarks

He distributed brief descriptions of diversity faculty recruitment strategies suggested by V. Brown and M. Schneider for discussion later in the meeting.

He noted that Friday is the deadline for proposals for Mellon postdoc proposals. We have money for three appointments and so far have received one proposal. He will be bringing these proposals to Council for consideration next week.

He noted that J. Brand has asked that the October 15th agenda include a presentation by him and a discussion of the College budget. This presentation would be informed by the prior meeting of the Budget Steering Committee.

The Dean noted that Council will soon be receiving position descriptions for term positions that will be considered next week by the academic sub-committee of the Budget Steering Committee.

Council Remarks

M. Schneider noted that if there were to be an acoustical study undertaken in the process of renovating Herrick Chapel he would like to recommend two Grinnell alums who are Ph.D. candidates at the University of Nebraska at Omaha and experienced in acoustics.

L. Gregg-Jolly was asked by a faculty member to bring an article "Racist Ideology" by Lewis Gordon to Council to inform their discussions on diversity since there are no persons of color on Council. She distributed copies of the article.

S. Barber asked if there were plans to review the efficacy of the policy to cease paper distribution of the campus memo. The President responded that he would like to see a paper and electronic message go out to all faculty asking them if they want hard copy.

S. Barber noted that he took M. Schneider's recommendation to heart and read the Chronicle article on athletics and elite liberal arts colleges. He urged that prior to any adjustments to our athletic program that a study be done looking at some of the issues brought up by the Bowen-Levin book.

M. Schneider asked the President to explain the change in the way we ask our non-exempt staff to account for their time (from paper self-reporting of hours to electronic monitoring and recording). The President responded that the change was recommended for reasons of cost-effectiveness and efficiency brought about by the elimination of paper and hand-entry. Both M. Schneider and V. Brown urged that staff be clearly told that these are the reasons and not that, as many suspect, the College does not trust them to self-report. The President noted that the Director of Accounting is meeting with the Support Staff Relations Committee about the changes in procedure.

Definition of Sabbatical Leave

M. Schneider asked for background on the issue and surmised that the main issue is that some departments define a semester sabbatical leave as 2 courses, some 2½, and some 3. V. Brown noted that ½ course does not exist beyond the Science Division. M. Schneider pointed out that there are two-credit courses offered in the other divisions. R. Vetter noted the importance of recognizing what constitutes a course when it is outside the classroom paradigm and asked if it were common for faculty members to teach overloads. The Dean said he was aware of only very few cases (in emergencies) where there is compensated overload. L. Gregg-Jolly suggested that this is a very complicated issue and that if a decision needs to be made she would tend toward continuing current practice. S. Barber asked the Dean what precipitated this issue being brought to Council. The Dean noted that a problem arises when MAP credits are claimed, in combination with sabbatical leaves. R. Vetter noted that this issue is really a convolution of two problems--1) the number of courses represented by a semester sabbatical leave, and 2) cashing in accumulated MAP credits.

The Dean noted that at this time parental leaves and study leaves are defined as two courses, sabbatical leave, and research leaves are undefined in terms of courses. There was a lengthy discussion of this issue, especially relating to inequity among departments, additional administrative problems for department chairs and the Dean, impact on the curriculum, fairness in relation to the very concept of leave, and cost to the College.

The Dean stated that he would prepare a discussion document for the next Council meeting. M. Schneider suggested that this issue go forward to the departments for their discussion and comment and that any changes need to be made in the Faculty Handbook. The President argued that changes should not be made to the Handbook because things like this change too much. The Dean suggested that any guidance on this issue be placed in the guidelines dealing with leaves.

Diversity Inititative

The President noted that, as we learned from the Michigan affirmative action ruling, whatever Council decides to do with regard to diversity recruitment we need to stay very close to the original diversity initiative definition and within our likely hiring procedures or we will need to take a close look at any legal implications. He is in favor of looking at new strategies, even at some additional cost, but would like that discussion to be part of a more robust discussion in April when we look at the larger picture with regard to faculty hiring. He commented on both strategies put forward for discussion by Council members. He believes the post-graduate strategy is a good one. However, he does not favor the "grow your own" strategy for several reasons. It is expensive for both the College and potentially for the student who may not be able to receive fellowships and other benefits/compensation because of the Grinnell contribution to their graduate school expenses. The employment promise is unenforceable and undesirable. He has questions about tying the hands of a traditionally underrepresented student. Finally, if he were to expand expenditures for this he would favor doing so through the Consortium for a Strong Minority Presence program which has been very successful. L. Gregg-Jolly asked if he is precluding opportunity hires. He responded that he is not. It was decided that this issue would not be resolved at this time.

The meeting adjourned at 6:25 p.m.

Secretary
Karen Wiese