Minutes
Faculty Senate Meeting
January 22, 2003
Patrick Kehoe called the meeting to order at 1:50 p.m.
Present: Professors Ahrens, Burke, Doolittle, Douglass, Forst, Heintze, Irvine Belson, Jennings,
Jernigan, Kehoe, Kravetz, Langbein, Riddick, Riley, Rosenbloom, Rubenstein, Schaeff, Sha,
Williams. Provost Kerwin.
Absent: Professors Brenner, Hakim, Olmsted
The minutes of the December 4, 2002 meeting were approved.
Report of the Provost
Neil Kerwin reported that his office had received from the academic units all the documents for
the graduate program review. He said that material would be circulated to the deans and
distributed to the Joint Committee on Curriculum and Academic Programs, for a determination
about cross-unit implications. The materials will also be made available to the Faculty Senate on
through a link to an intranet site.
Dr. Kerwin then summarized some of the changes proposed by the major teaching units:
•
The College of Arts and Sciences is recommending a variety of actions, including the
termination of programs at both the doctoral and the master’s degree level. The college is
also calling for a series of enhancements for graduate programs that are sufficiently
meritorious and strong as to benefit from increased resources.
•
The Kogod School of Business is recommending that the program in Information
Sciences that was transferred to the school last year be replaced by a radically different
program that focuses on information systems management.
•
The School of Public Affairs is recommending termination of the Master’s degree in
Political Science, Comparative Politics. A recommendation is forthcoming about the
Master of Science in Personnel and Human Resource Management.
•
The School of International Service has concluded that its master’s degree program could
benefit from smaller incoming classes, with a goal of raising the quality of the student
body by lowering the admit rate.
Dr. Kerwin said he believed the Faculty Senate could begin a preliminary discussion of the
graduate program review in February, with more extensive discussion planned for March.
As a second topic, Dr. Kerwin outlined his priorities for the next budget cycle, which is a twoyear planning cycle. Those priorities include:
•
A 4 percent merit base for faculty salary increases, with a base supplement of several
hundred thousand dollars held in reserve, should early analyses suggest that AAUP level
one is in jeopardy for one or more faculty ranks.
•
A base fund in the amount of $1 million for full-time faculty lines. This is a first step
toward the reduction of adjunct faculty.
•
An additional allocation for graduate financial aid on the order of several hundred
thousand dollars.
•
An enhancement to the base budget for the University Library in the amount of $400,000.
•
An allocation of $500,000 for the Presidential Research Fellows Program.
•
Further contributions to the quasi-endowment and to the tuition reserve fund.
Dr. Kerwin emphasized he was also endorsing, in the strongest possible terms, the new capital
campaign launched by the Office of Development. He also said that he and Don Myers, Vice
President of Finance and Treasurer, would hold a university-wide town meeting on the budget.
As a third topic, the Provost provided the following update on the Middle States re-accreditation
effort:
•
The nine task forces were at work drafting sections of the university’s self report, in
accordance with the outline approved by the Middle States Commission last year.
•
The Institutional Review Board was in the process of reviewing, prior to distribution, a
survey of the faculty that is intended to supplement the self-study.
•
The Middle States office had been asked to take into account several critical
characteristics of AU, as a site-visit team is selected.
Finally, Dr. Kerwin commented on the success of the Ann Ferren Teaching Conference on
January 11th . He said the conference was well-attended. The timing of the event was also
appropriate, allowing the community to focus on the importance of teaching just prior to the start
of a new semester. Dr. Kerwin thanked John Richardson and the staff of the Center for Teaching
Excellence for their work on preparations for the conference.
Report of the Chair
Pat Kehoe provided a progress report on the revision of academic regulation 50.00.04, rules of
the Senate. He said the sub-committee working on the revisions had concluded, after an initial
review, that the regulations should be streamlined, to allow the Senate more flexibility in how it
conducts its business. The sub-committee, which includes Professor Kehoe, Washington College
of Law; Leigh Riddick, Kogod School of Business; and Jim Heintze, University Library, plans to
present proposed changes to the Senate for action in March.
Budget Proposal Discussion
John Douglass, chair of the Committee on Instructional Budget and Benefits, began his report by
noting that the committee fully supported the priorities that Provost Kerwin outlined for fiscal
years 2004 and 2005, including the call for continued contributions to the quasi-endowment and
the tuition reserve fund. He then informed the Senate that the committee was requesting two
allocations over and above those recommended by the Provost.
•
An additional $250,000 for the University Library: $150,000 to expand subscriptions and
electronic resources in the areas of the humanities, the sciences, and the social sciences;
and $100,000 to add to the library’s collection.
•
An additional $250,000 to raise adjunct faculty salaries.
Professor Douglass also commented on the budget formulation process, observing that the
Senate committee’s review was more limited in scope than in the past, because it only had the
opportunity to review the instructional budget. He added, however, that budget information from
the other vice presidents would be presented to the University Council, which is assuming the
role played by the former University Budget Committee. That information would thereafter be
presented to the Budget and Benefits Committee by the members who also serve on the council,
John Douglass and Pat Kehoe.
Report on Grade Inflation
Cathy Schaeff, Chair of the Joint Committee on Curriculum and Academic Programs, discussed
with the Senate the issue of grade inflation. She said the committee had begun to look at the
issue, based on the premise that grades at AU had increased over the past decades, and with the
following question in mind: Is the increase warranted? The committee identified a number of
factors that may influence grade inflation and also decided to present two initial
recommendations:
•
A call for the academic units to review the methods by which courses are assessed.
•
A call for specific information to be publicized about the link between how student
evaluations of teaching are interpreted and grade distributions.
Professor Schaeff noted that the committee would look closely at patterns once it receives the
current data.
During the discussion, other senators raised the following questions:
•
Is grade inflation actually a problem? Are there meaningful negative consequences for
the university’s students?
•
If AU overcompensates, are we putting our students at a distinct disadvantage with their
peers at other institutions?
•
Can the problem be articulated more clearly before the committee, or the Senate, begins
assessing the issue?
Report from the Committee on Information Services
Sarah Irvine Belson provided a brief report on the work of the Committee on Information
Services. She said the committee would focus their efforts this year in four specific areas:
•
How decisions are made on campus about investments in new technology.
•
Issues related to copyright policy, to acceptable use policy, and to student privacy and the
confidentiality of student information.
•
How information literacy is taught, as part of the effort to develop lifelong learners.
•
Standards for using technology in the creation of new sources of information on campus.
Professor Irvine Belson advised with regard to the first issue that the committee was working on
a proposal whereby faculty can have more input into decisions about the purchase of hardware
on campus. With respect to the fourth issue, she noted, as an example, that the web site for the
Faculty Senate was inaccessible to persons with disabilities. The site was also not compliant with
World Wide Web Consortium guidelines.
Discussion of Substantive Issues for the Senate
to Consider during AY 2002-2003
The Senate decided to postpone its discussion of strategic initiatives until the February meeting.
Leigh Riddick volunteered to compile of list of ideas; she asked that the other senators send her
their suggestions, with brief supporting statements.
During the time remaining, several senators did speak about the issues they consider important:
Leigh Riddick, Kogod School of Business
• The ability to hire and retain good, young faculty.
• Problems with the 8:10 p.m. class slot.
• More electronic journal acquisitions for the library.
Paul Williams, School of International Service
• Teaching load and research expectations
• A more precise laying out of expectations with regard to adjuncts.
Laura Langbein, School of Public Affairs
• The use of the Student Evaluation of Teaching in the merit review process.
• The review of administrators and faculty involvement in that process.
John Doolittle, School of Communication
• An effort, university-wide, to achieve a more diverse student body and a more diverse faculty.
• The need for community building.
Jim Heintze, University Library
• Some sense of how recommendations from the committees relate to the Middle States report.
David Rosenbloom, School of Public Affairs
• Scheduling and classrooms.
Katharine Kravetz, Washington Semester Program
• The integration of experiential learning into the larger picture of a student’s university
experience.
John Douglass
• Creative ways to utilize the facility during the summer, in order to generate new sources of
revenue.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:10 p.m.