CFR FACULTY MEETING MINUTES
2 May, 2006
PRESENT : Bradley, Brubaker, Doty, Edmonds , Greulich, Gustafson, Halpern, Harrison , Manuwal, Marzluff,
McKean, Paun, Reichard, Ryan, Schreuder, Sprugel, D Vogt, K Vogt, West
EXCUSED: Agee, Bolton, Briggs, Brown, Fridley , Hodgson, Johnson
ABSENT : Allan, Bare, Eastin, Ewing, Ford, Franklin , Gara, Hinckley, Lee, Mabberley, Perez-Garcia, Peterson,
Raedeke, Schiess, Strand , Turnblom, Wott, Zabowksi
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Linda Brubaker thanked the faculty for attending the BioResource candidates’ seminars and reminded everyone that next week there will be the vote on the search committee recommendations. Linda also encouraged
the faculty to attend the remaining candidate interviews.
Rick Gustafson explained that the PSE evaluations of student writing made them push for improved writing instruction. So they met with Technical Communication Lecturer Karen Kasonic to discuss teaching methods and
they voted to change the curriculum to incorporate better writing exercises for PSE students. They were very
pleased with the results and Karen will be giving two workshops that are open to all CFR faculty and teaching
assistants. These will help with grading writing assignments and designing writing assignments.
Appointments
Chrissy Scannell to teach entomology at Pack Forest this summer. David Manuwal motioned to accept and Rob
Harrison seconded.
Cara Nelson to be a part time lecturer of CFR 501 this autumn 2006. She will teach this class regardless if she
gets the Assistant Professor position or not. Rob Harrison motioned to accept and Bob Edmonds seconded.
Lauri Valsta to be a visiting scholar with Bruce Lippke as his faculty sponsor. There will be no financial support
or space allocated for Professor Valsta. Gerard Schreuder motioned to accept and Bob Edmonds seconded.
A show of hands by the faculty present and electronic ballots sent to absent faculty approved all three positions were approved with 27 total faculty votes, no opposing or abstaining votes were cast.
PMT Procedures
Rick Gustafson said that while the data collection has been problematic, we cannot make massive fundamental
changes to the procedures at this time. Therefore, the faculty must come to terms with some procedures that
can be ‘lived with’ this week.
At that time, PMT committee chair, David Manuwal produced a checklist for the proposed procedures. The
committee will review all of the data individually and then meet as a group to make the final decisions that will
be recommended. There was some clarification of the categories of evaluation again (funding, proposals, etc)
and why they were asking for that information. Student credit hours will be an important category again this
year. The summary page should include research highlights and any student work and teaching you have accomplished over the past three years.
If the faculty members choose not to approve these procedures, then they will use the system proposed last
year.
Frank Greulich said that it seemed that a brief statement about each faculty member from the committee
would make it easier for the chair and dean to make a decision rather than just receiving a single recommendation such as “highly meritorious”. David explained that all of the recommendations would be given to the Chair
to pass along to the Dean.
Rob Harrison asked about the checklists and when the faculty could review them or if they would be made
available for the faculty to view. David said that the faculty should trust your colleagues to make good judgments as the PMT was appointed to do just that.
John Marzluff began a topic of discussion about the confusion with the numbering system and evaluation
categories for last year’s procedures. Several faculty members added their critiques of the system. At this time,
Rick reminded the faculty that they would be voting on THIS year’s proposed procedures and any corrections
to the system would be addressed next year. Another discussion began about what denotes fair evaluation and
what categories deserve more weight in the final analysis. Rick explained to the faculty that good teaching,
solid research and lots of service will get faculty recognized. That is what they are looking for in these recommendations – to get good faculty recognition.
After reassurance from David Manuwal that the PMT committee would give a strong statement to the Chair for
any non meritorious faculty member to validate their decision – Rick asked for a motion to vote on the procedures. David Manuwal made a motion to accept and Doug Sprugel seconded.
Ballots were distributed and those not present were sent electronic ballots. The final vote was:
Approve new procedure: 16
Oppose new procedure: 11
Abstain: 2
Vote PASSED .
Adjourned 11:30 a.m.