Present: C. Hunter, E. Marzluff, J. Meehan, R. Osgood, S. Rebelsky, T. Roberts, J. Swartz, E. Willis

The meeting came to order at 4:20 p.m. in Room 226 of the Rosenfield Student Center. The minutes of November 15, 2006 were approved.

President’s Remarks

The President noted that he will be hosting the graduating seniors at his home for dinner this evening.

Dean’s Remarks

The Dean distributed a graph showing the number of and average enrollment (as of the add/drop date) for tutorials since 1990. The average enrollment in tutorials varies somewhat from year to year but has not increased over this period.

The Dean noted that we need more tutorials taught next year. T. Roberts asked if the number of tutorial expectations per faculty member has increased over time. The President responded that it has, in fact, been reduced as the number of faculty has grown. E. Willis noted that there is a tremendous variability by department in relation to the expectation for tutorial teaching by new tenure-track faculty. There was a lengthy discussion of the vagaries of teaching the tutorial.

The Dean distributed a draft agenda for the next faculty meeting. There was discussion.

Council Remarks

J. Meehan suggested, that in view of the recent necessity for her to drive a student for mental health services after 6:00 p.m. because no one else was available, student services may need additional resources in order to meet their responsibilities. The President responded that the Office of Security has this responsibility after hours and that there must have been some type of miscommunication.

E. Marzluff noted that, once again, catering failed to meet its pre-arranged obligations to provide breakfast for a candidate staying at Grinnell House. She reiterated a previous request that campus dining services be able to provide a full, hot breakfast for candidates brought to campus to interview. There was some discussion.

J. Meehan asked why only one parking space in the lot attached to the Rosenfield Student Center is available for non-handicapped parking. The Dean responded that there are the minimum number of required handicapped parking spaces.

E. Willis noted that the Curriculum Committee discussed a range of options regarding the imposition of distribution requirements applied to off-campus study, double majors, and early graduation. They would like to bring these options to the division meetings at the beginning of next semester for feedback before moving forward on this issue.

C. Hunter noted that he has been responsible for writing the Department’s Affirmative Action statement associated with the most recent search. It took him a long time because there is a lot of data collection and summarization required which he was unaware of during the process of looking at applications. It would have been easier to keep tally as that process unfolded than to go back and do it after the process was complete. He suggests the Dean send out a list of those data that need to be reported in the AA statement to all department chairs to avoid this duplication of effort in future. He also suggested that if we are to fully meet our diversity goals we need to require that AA reporting data comment on all of our diversity criteria, including curricular and pedagogical diversity contributions. With that information, we would be better able to track our success, when departments indicate briefly why a each candidate who applied and whose dossier was reviewed was or was not further considered in light of our stated diversity criteria. The President agreed, but others thought this quite cumbersome.

Psychology Department Proposal

Council discussed a proposal from the Psychology Department.

Search Committee for Athletic Director

The Dean distributed a list of proposed committee members to serve on the search committee for the new Athletic Director. Discussion ensued.

Theatre-Design

Council discussed a proposal from the Theatre Department.

The President left the meeting at 5:45 p.m.

Concerns Regarding EKI Appointments to Departments

S. Rebelsky opened a discussion of concerns voiced by departments about the advantages and disadvantages of receiving an EKI appointment in their department. Many different concerns have been expressed to most members of Council. A partial list includes the following.

• If we accept an EKI appointment, will we be punished by not being able to return to Council with additional position requests in future?
• Will we be required to teach additional tutorials and statistics sections?
• What are the consequences to departmental governance if an EKI appointment, who does not teach many courses for the department or irregularly does so, is allowed to vote?

The Dean indicated that interdisciplinary appointments will be complicated and that if we are to succeed we need to accept that complexity. E. Marzluff noted that the College has advertised these positions several times in recent years with no faculty objection voiced and has reflected on what is different this time around. She has concluded that this time the faculty know that there are other things on the table which could be viewed by them as opportunity costs associated with these appointments which complicate the situation as perceived by the departments. The Dean stated that there is no way of determining the resolution of these concerns or issues except on a case-by-case basis. There was further discussion.

E. Willis and E. Marzluff urged the Dean to have this discussion with the potential departments involved in the current round of EKI searches and possible appointments as soon as possible to allay these fears of consequences.

E. Marzluff reviewed the process for making a recommendation for an EKI appointment to the President. First, the Committee will write a proposal which ranks the candidates and presents the Affirmative Action information. This, accompanied by a letter from the department which would serve as the home for the new appointment, would go to Council for consideration. In order for this process to go smoothly the two Search Chairs and candidates are having extensive meetings with the involved departments.

Beyond the issues surrounding appointment to departments, the Dean noted that he has received several concerns regarding review procedures. He noted that there are precedents at Grinnell in the recent past which involved bring in external expertise to assist in the review.

The meeting was adjourned at 6:15 p.m.

Secretary
Karen Wiese