School of Environmental and Forest Sciences
Faculty Meeting Minutes
February 25, 2014, 10:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.
Anderson Hall Room 22
CALL TO ORDER
• The meeting was called to order at 10:34 a.m. by Director Tom DeLuca. Bruce Bare moved and Eric Turnblom
seconded the motion that the faculty approve the Minutes of the February 11, 2014 Faculty Meeting by a vote of
29 Approve, 0 Oppose, 2 Abstain of 38 eligible to vote faculty.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
• Here is the URL for the Winter Quarter line-up of the SEFS Seminar Series:
http://depts.washington.edu/sefsblog/tag/sefs-seminar-series/ The series is on Wednesdays this quarter and
tomorrow’s speaker is Kathy Wolf, SEFS: “Ecosystem services in the city? The evidence for expanded
definitions and values” Dr. DeLuca encouraged faculty to attend the seminar as a community building
event that affords opportunity to interact with graduate students and for them to see and interact with you.
Dr. DeLuca asks that you help him find ways for the faculty to get together informally. He will not be at the
next two seminars because of travel.
• Candidates for the Mediated Ecosystem Disturbances faculty position will visit the UW campus on the dates
below. Their CVs have been posted on this Catalyst site:
https://catalyst.uw.edu/collectit/dropbox/nevada/30836
March 7, Dr. Justine Karst, Department of Renewable Resources, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
 10:30-11:30 a.m. Meeting with SEFS Faculty, Winkenwerder 103
 1:30-3:00 p.m. Research Seminar, Forest Club Room, reception immediately following
March 10, Dr. Patrick Tobin, USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Morgantown, WV
 10:30-11:30 a.m. Meeting with SEFS Faculty, Anderson 22
 1:30-3:00 p.m. Research Seminar, Forest Club Room, reception immediately following
March 14, Dr. Thomas “Seth” Davis, Department of Plant, Soil, and Entomological Sciences, University of
Idaho, Moscow, ID
 10:30-11:30 a.m. Meeting with SEFS Faculty, Anderson 22
 1:30-3:00 p.m. Research Seminar, Winkenwerder 201, reception immediately following
March 17, Dr. Aaron Shiels, National Wildlife Research Center, USDA APHIS, Hilo, HI
 10:30-11:30 a.m. Meeting with SEFS Faculty, Anderson 22
 1:30-3:00 p.m. Research Seminar, Forest Club Room, reception immediately following
• The Arctic Minor has been approved in SAFS. Dr. Gallucci stated that the international policy and natural
science mixture is somewhat unique. A supervising board will be appointed based on MOU between
Oceanography and Jackson School. Many units of CoEnv are involved. The program is available to
undergraduate students. 3 new FTEs and a couple of postdocs have been contributed by the CoEnv. SEFS
has six or seven courses listed in the course list. Dr. Gallucci also mentioned that Future of Ice Seminar
Series is filling Kane Hall rooms to capacity.
• Michael Green has been invited to speak for Sustaining our World Seminar. He is a TED Talk speaker. He
is an architect that focuses on green building design of tall wood structures with regionally sourced
materials scheduled for April 10, 2014 in Kane Hall. You will need to register for a seat for the lecture.
FACULTY ACTIONS
• Proposed Renewal of Assistant Professor Appointment
Rob Harrison moved and Monika Moskal seconded the motion that the faculty approve the recommendation
of the Promotion, Merit, and Tenure Committee that the assistant professor appointment of Dr. Fernando
Resende be renewed. The faculty voted to renew this appointment. The results of the vote are on file in the
Director’s office.
PRESENTATION
• No presentations are planned.
\\cfr.washington.edu\main\Groups\Dept\Chairs\FACULTY MEETINGS\Faculty Meeting Minutes\2014\02-25-14 Faculty Meeting Minutes.doc
Faculty Meeting Minutes
Page 2
DISCUSSION
• The PMT Committee is soliciting input from the faculty concerning what they might consider to be the
criteria, below which a faculty member would be ranked as non-meritorious on the annual PMT assessment
that is advisory to the Director. PMT Committee has prepared a document to begin the discussion and it is
attached.
Dr. Marzluff stated we want to listen to faculty, get feedback on a new PMT alternative that is simpler that is
easier to enter information. The main concern with the current situation is that all the information in it, the
PMT Committee gets a final ranking and there is very little opportunity for thought by the committee about
extenuating circumstances. A simpler way might be for the Committee to look at each person’s contributions.
General strategy would be that 3 year period would be evaluated. The faculty would provide a paragraph with
goals for the year, here’s what I accomplished, here’s why I didn’t accomplish, and here’s my contract
percentage document. It’s simple to say merit-no merit more difficult for merit-high merit. Everybody will be
evaluated for merit-no merit and only those who want to be evaluated for high merit will be evaluated for high
merit.
Looking for evidence of your contributions in Research Teaching and Service. Two papers per year is a low bar
standard. There is no magic number and there is flexibility. Lots of other products could be considered such as
patents or book chapters. It would be up to faculty to say why they didn’t produce papers. Research support—
they want evidence that you are going for it and you got some. For teaching they want evidence that you are
teaching, that you are meeting terms of contract, have high marks, and that you are effectively mentoring grad
students and undergrads. As far as service, please show evidence that you are contributing.
Faculty think that a statement on sabbatical and medical leave should be factored in. A question arose about
administrative service that is part of the work plan percentages. If the administrative service is in the work plan
then different goals need to be described in the first paragraph. The committee believes they are low bars. Here
are my goals and objectives and here are my contract percentages. Divide by number of quarters. If someone is
receiving an administrative supplement they shouldn’t be punished for contributing in this way. A no merit
judgment is REALLY loaded. Would have to be nonmeritorious for a while. Administration is a contribution
that is very important. The stigma of no merit faculty is significant. To have a specific number for pubs but no
quantitative evidence for teaching or service is uneven. What is the threshold? We are now being evaluated in
the larger CoEnv context. A faculty member thought it was reasonable to have recognition of large courses
because it is difficult to get good teaching evaluations. Dr. Gallucci stated that SAFS sends a letter that
communicates in a nonquantitative with a warning and advice of what faculty should do to improve. Two
papers per year is a reasonable one to achieve. Peer review publication or equivalent (such as a patent). Putting
a lot of time into developing a course, might be another product. What is the new plan hoping to incentivize—
number of publications? They want to adjust in line with SEFS vision.
If going to be considered for high merit then you need to tell committee about their exceptional year or 3 years
which would allow committee to focus in why you think you are exceptional. Faculty suggested that the
committee look at the records and suggest which faculty to apply for high merit.
UPCOMING MEETING
The next School of Environmental and Forest Sciences Faculty Meeting will be on Tuesday, March 11, 2014
from 10:30 to 11:30 a.m. in Anderson Hall Room 22.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 11:32 a.m.
\\cfr.washington.edu\main\Groups\Dept\Chairs\FACULTY MEETINGS\Faculty Meeting Minutes\2014\02-25-14 Faculty Meeting Minutes.doc