Present: J. Cummins, B. Ferguson, K. Jacobson, J. Meehan, R. Osgood, 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 December 5, 2007 were approved.

President’s Remarks

The President noted that he is traveling to New York City this week and will attend a preliminary meeting of the Budget Committee of the Board of Trustees and inform them of the current budget projections and he will attend a meeting of the Investment Committee.

Dean’s Remarks

He updated Council on the status of faculty searches.

He has notified Karla Erickson and Sujeev Wickramasekara that they have been awarded Harris leaves for 2008-09. He also noted that announcements of Study Leave awards will be sent out today.

Council Remarks

S. Rebelsky expressed concerns about the use of the fire exits in the Noyce Science Center.

J. Meehan noted that many interviews of candidates for various positions have taken place in faculty house recently and that the house needs refurbishing. The President replied that Facilities Management plans to discuss how to approach various issues associated with that building, including accessibility.

B. Ferguson reported on a recent Social Studies Division meeting at which there was a robust discussion of the adequacy of teaching spaces in ARH and Carnegie, with many expressing problems with the structural obstacles limiting the potential for renovation in those buildings. The President responded by noting the need for a campus-wide classroom study. E. Willis urged the President to take action and present a plan with a timeline. S. Rebelsky noted that such a study would need to explicitly take classroom computer use into consideration. The subject of teaching spaces in the Science Building was broached as offering some amelioration of the immediate needs of the Humanities and Social Studies faculty. E. Willis argued strongly against that option citing the inappropriate configuration of the classrooms in that facility for meeting the pedagogical needs of the non-science faculty. There was further discussion.

E. Willis noted that she intends to inform the faculty of the recommendation of the Personnel Committee to Department Chairs urging them to share review letters and the intent to change procedures next year.

Leaves for Assistant Professors

Council continued its discussion of requests for leave without pay from untenured faculty. This has become an issue because the Dean received four such requests this year in contrast to past years where one such request would be unusual. S. Rebelsky asked whether the College continues to pay benefits while a faculty member is on leave without pay. The Dean responded that health insurance and contribution to retirement is continued without interruption. After considerable discussion of the pros (enhancement of research) and cons (removal from the classroom), J. Cummins attempted to find the principle(s) forming the basis of what seemed to be an emerging policy on requests for leave without pay from untenured faculty members in future. E. Willis noted that while it is important to send a strong message to pre-tenure faculty that the College supports their scholarly work, there are limits to what the institution will allow. The President reiterated his position on full year leaves for pre-tenured faculty stating that he generally disfavors the practice, but stated his strong support for rewarding tenure and continued scholarly productivity post tenure.

The President left the meeting at 2:50 p.m.

The Executive Council discussed the need to balance supporting faculty scholarship with remaining flexible with respect to faculty schedules, staffing our courses with tenured and tenure track faculty members, and providing adequate time for pre-tenure faculty members to develop as teachers and construct a strong record prior to the tenure review.

The Council recommended the following policy components.

• We continue to provide Harris leaves competitively awarded and set as a goal to increase the number from two to three annually beginning in 2009-2010.
• We generally limit other pre-tenure, scholarly leaves to the one-semester research leave.
• If a faculty member has an unusual opportunity or project, the Executive Council will consider a proposal for an additional semester of leave. Under normal circumstances an additional semester of leave will require that the faculty member has been awarded a peer reviewed fellowship or grant to support the leave. In order to facilitate planning, faculty members should normally submit applications for such additional semester leaves in the fall semester with confirmation of the grant and leave no later than February 1. In the event that a candidate for an additional semester of leave has not received confirmation of the fellowship or grant by the February 1 notification date, the candidate’s absence from campus for the additional semester can be delayed until the next academic year, so that departments can make adequate plans for replacements. As with a Harris Leave an additional semester of leave (beyond the one semester research leave) requires that the Personnel Committee has assured that the teaching up to the time of the complete review is of high enough quality that the additional semester of leave will not interfere with establishing a record of excellent teaching prior to the tenure review.

The Executive Council debated whether or not these policies should apply to this year's applicants. However, given that the substantial majority of leaves that Council has previously approved have met these criteria, Council unanimously voted to apply these criteria in the current cases.

S. Rebelsky objected to the message that is being sent to pre-tenure faculty that pursuit of their scholarly projects is not a priority in the consideration of all of their responsibilities. Further, he does not think it fair to impose a new policy on the four faculty members who submitted requests for unpaid semester leaves which would be coupled with their one-semester research leave to produce a full year leave since the policy was not in existence when they applied.

In the end, Council approved the adoption of the policy governing requests for leave without pay from pre-tenure faculty members, as stated above. Council also agreed that the existing requests for leave without pay from current pre-tenure faculty will be subject to this new policy.

Promotion to Full Professor

The Council discussed possible candidates for promotion to full professor.

At 3:10 the meeting relocated to 200-C for a continuation of this discussion. K. Jacobson asked what the criteria are for consideration of a faculty member for promotion to full professor. E. Willis responded that key criteria include the existence of peer-reviewed publications since tenure, continuation of strong teaching, continuation of service to the College. The Dean also noted that consideration is not usually given to those with less than six years beyond tenure. For eligible faculty who have the least amount of post-tenure time in service there needs to be a stronger record than who have served longer in the associate professor rank. Willis noted that the purpose of the Council triage on the list is to help assure that the promotion case goes through Personnel Committee review more easily and presents no real issues which could be contended.

The meeting was adjourned at 3:25 p.m.

Secretary
Karen Wiese