Present: J. Cummins, B. Ferguson, K. Jacobson, J. Meehan, S. Rebelsky, J. Swartz, E. Willis

The meeting came to order at 1:15 p.m. in room 203 of the Rosenfield Student Center.

The minutes and excerpts from November 7, 2007 were approved.

President’s Remarks

The President was traveling.

Dean’s Remarks

The Dean made some personnel announcements.

Council Remarks

E. Willis consulted with Council members earlier in the week and has decided to cancel the Faculty meeting scheduled for November 19th. In place of an official meeting, she plans to invite the faculty to talk about the future of the Harris Leave program. The Dean noted that it is important for the faculty to talk about how it is serving their needs and how best to use the funding to serve what kinds of support might best serve their scholarly needs. He also noted that any substantial change to the program would require a Faculty Handbook amendment and an official vote of the Board of Trustees.

Willis also noted that the Personnel Committee discussed the possibility of changing the process of promotion to full professor because the current process allows a faculty member to come forward for review when they are not yet ready. The Committee thought that a mini-review could take place ahead of the time when a member could step forward which would give Council more information than they currently have access to in making recommendations for promotion.

S. Rebelsky thanked Scott Baumler and Carlie Van Willigen for quickly getting summaries of end-of-course evaluations for use by the Faculty Budget Committee.

He announced that Kumail Nanjiani ’01, a former student of his and J. Meehan, will be presenting his comedy this Friday in Main Hall lounge.

Rebelsky noted that a student has complained to him that the College practice of sending a letter home to the parents about the student’s grades.

Rebelsky also noted that at a recent Science Division meeting faculty expressed desire for Council attention to the problems experienced this past semester with registration. K. Jacobson distributed a draft memorandum from Council to the department chairs soliciting information about the registration experience of their department last semester to try to help Council better understand the local issues and asked the Dean for his reaction.

J. Meehan noted that the enrollment pressure is at the introductory level within the disciplines leading to majors. She suggested that EKI appointments would do nothing to address this problem and that departmental expansion is the only solution. The Dean reminded Council that the current enrollment pressure is the result of an unusually large enrollment and we planned to have at least 8 more faculty members here before we reached the target enrollment of 1500 on campus. As part of her participation on the Faculty Budget Committee, K. Jacobson noted that the budgetary implications document provides information which should be shared with the faculty and their input solicited in the process of decision-making.

E. Willis suggested that Council be involved in the evaluation of the EKI in order to establish a dialogue about these issues. S. Rebelsky expressed his concern regarding the EKI Advisory Board becoming too powerful in relation to the academic program because it is not an elected body. Jacobson asked if the Advisory Board had discussed the possibility of making more than 12 EKI appointments. Rebelsky replied that this had not been a subject of conversation this year. J. Cummins noted that for hiring under EKI there is a public timetable which is widely understood but nothing similar for non-EKI additions to the faculty. He further noted that departments may be under the impression that their only avenues for expansion are through diversity or through interdisciplinary appointments. J. Meehan noted that, at the end of the day, if a department prevails in its need for expansion it is the result of happenstance. It is clear that tension exists between meeting special interests and meeting the basic needs of our students. The Dean agreed that we are at a moment in time where we can reasonably examine the effect and continuing appropriateness of the EKI, but that this is not the time to continue such discussion without the President as a participant. All agreed.

J. Cummins asked if, when Terri Phipps sends him a copy the draft Faculty News Digest, he is being asked to respond. The Dean noted that it is sent in draft to all Division Chairs to provide corrections and additions prior to its dissemination.

B. Ferguson noted that Monty Roper, representing the EKI Advisory Board, presented the Board’s current thinking about a definition of interdisciplinarity. He also mentioned to the faculty that the Harris Leave program is currently under discussion by the Council and this drew a response which would indicate this is a subject ripe for further discussion.

Leaves for Assistant Professors

E. Willis noted that she had had further conversations with Council about the application of 20% per course reduction of pay for unpaid leave and all were in agreement that this was appropriate. However, she noted that there is disagreement on the number of courses counted in the definition of a one-semester leave.

With regard to the larger question of whether or not to approve a request for leave without pay from an untenured faculty member, Willis agreed with B. Ferguson in questioning whether or not this was an issue that requires a written policy or could simply be left to the discretion of the Dean. The Dean noted that the request for leave without pay comes to Council with a context statement and response from the department—which should provide Council with the critical information regarding teaching it needs for consideration of the request. He thinks that Council needs to help departments be honest in providing its assessment of teaching and not let them put the hard decision off to the point where it is too late. Willis noted that the most permissive policy would be one that would allow such leaves as long as teaching is regarded as good. The most restrictive policy would be to allow such leaves only in the case of the existence of external funding. J. Cummins suggested that external funding should not be part of the calculus.

Cummins asked if leave approval is linked to replacement approval. The Dean responded that departments have choices to make. Once again, the tension between practice and policy with regard to reliance on term appointments is apparent. Members asked what the last date should be for an untenured faculty member to commit to taking an unpaid leave—in relation to the issue of variable schedules of funding agencies and foundations for decision-making which don’t necessarily match up with our needs for recruitment of term replacements. The Dean responded that November 15th allows sufficient time for departments to proceed with recruiting. The Dean noted that if this discussion results in a change of current procedure a Faculty Handbook change may be in order.

The meeting adjourned at 3:20 p.m.

Secretary
Karen Wiese