Office of Institutional Effectiveness
The Best Place To Start
Standing Committee Improvement Report For 2014-2015
In accordance with College Procedure 2.01.01.14, Committees, the Office of Institutional Effectiveness, each May, requests the chairs of the College’s standing
committees to submit the Annual Standing Committee Chairs’ Year-End Improvement Report to inform the President of the College concerning the decisions and
effectiveness of the standing committees. The data are used to create this Standing Committee Improvement Report, which is available on the College web site:
http://www.epcc.edu/InstitutionalEffectiveness/Pages/StandingCommitteeImprovementReportbyCommittee.aspx .
FACULTY PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
CHARGE: To evaluate nominees' packets for faculty awards, evaluate faculty mini-grant and guest lecturer proposals, review faculty professional development leave
requests, and assist Faculty Development Coordinators as requested in the planning of Faculty Development activities.
Academic
Year
2014-2015
I. Response to last Year’s Chair’s recommended Plan
of Action
II. Recommendations and Receiving Administrator(s)
III. Recommended Plan of Action (e.g. Objectives) for
the Committee during the next Academic Year
The timelines for the Committee to evaluate the Minnie Stevens
Piper Award and Faculty Achievement Award packets were
adjusted slightly. This shortened the time for review, but did not
change the amount of time the applicants had to prepare their
packets. new members were welcomed and oriented to the
committee's charge at the September 2014 meeting. Members
are advised to look through all the packets for a particular award
before grading and to try and be as consistent as possible in their
evaluation of criteria.
The Faculty Recognition Dinner was successfully moved back to
the El Paso Club on the 18th floor of the Chase Building
downtown. The event was a great success. At one time, the
Valet Parking system became overloaded. Other parking areas at
reasonable rates are available nearby. This should be made
known for future occasions. FPD Committee members are paid
for, but not their guests.
The issue of ongoing project funding may need to be revisited,
particularly if it is anticipated they would deprive new applications
of funding. The Committee should look into how mini-grant
applications can be solicited earlier in the academic year.
The Committee decided to extend the deadline for Mini-Grant
applications beyond the beginning of April this year as a
significant percentage of the available funds were unused. This
resulted in a flurry of successful applications being made during
that month. The question of funding ongoing projects was
discussed again. There are no recent cases of a recurrent grant
depriving a new grant of funding. Ongoing projects should
consider finding a permanent funding source.
2013-2014
Scott Mann was elected to chair the committee for the
forthcoming year. Chair Andrew Auckland is rotating off the
committee.
The Fall semester FPD Committee’s discussion focused on the
Adjunct Faculty Award applicants’ instructions. It was noted that
in some instances, in the application packets certain sections
were not completed such as Community Service, Dean’s
Comments, or Publication/|Professional Development. This left
some Committee members unsure of how to evaluate and score
the said applicant’s packet.
The Faculty Awards Dinner was held in the same venue, as it was
a successful event in Spring 2013. Minor changes and
recommendations were adopted to improve the flow of the event.
For example, the recipients of awards were to be seated at
reserved tables at the front. Additionally, the menu was changed
to a buffet format to improve diminished waiting time and to allow
for greater menu selection.
Because of the importance of developing and clarifying these
guidelines, the task of re-defining the applicant guidelines for the
Adjunct Faculty Awards was taken up by an ad hoc committee, to
include volunteer members from the Faculty body at large. These
recommendations will apply to the next year’s Adjunct Faculty
Awards application process, which will begin in Spring 2015.
The Mini-Grant Award process continued to be successfully
executed via e-mail vote.
OFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT OF RESEARCH AND ACCOUNTABILITY
The Committee should have a tally of funds and remaining minigrant funds as the year progresses.
Mini-Grants: The process will continue as established. Grants
will be awarded based on Committees members’ approvals via email vote on the relevant attachments. The criterion of the minigrants having community-wide benefit or experience will be
sustained.
The Committee will look at the process of approving the
Committee’s minutes via e-mail in a timely manner after meetings.
This should be established as a routine. The minutes would be
sent out by the Chair after review, following submission by the
Secretary.
H:RS/Reports2014-2015/2014-2015CmteChairsAnnualImprovementRptFacultyProfessionalDev.docx
EPCC does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, gender, age, disability, veteran status, sexual orientation, or gender identity.
8/19/15
Page 1 of 3
Academic
Year
2012-2013
I. Response to last Year’s Chair’s recommended Plan
of Action
II. Recommendations and Receiving Administrator(s)
III. Recommended Plan of Action (e.g. Objectives) for
the Committee during the next Academic Year
The number of Adjunct Faculty Awards was increased from two to
three. This gives the Adjunct Faculty the same number of Awards
as Full-Time Faculty.
There is now consistency in the order of folder presentations for
the awards voted on by the Committee. It is modeled on the
Minnie Stevens Piper Professor Award stipulations.
The EPCC Annual Awards Dinner was moved to the Coronado
Country Club. A satisfaction survey was sent to participants, and
the results are not available at the time of writing this report.
Unless problems are identified with the above location, it is
proposed to continue to use it as there is now a familiarity with
this venue.
The Faculty Development Office did an outstanding job of
organizing the packets for the various awards into a consistent
format. This was one of the previous year’s goals.
The Committee decided that committee members with two
consecutive unexcused absences from meetings be removed, to
allow other College personnel the opportunity of serving.
Mini-Grants: There was a discussion at the first meeting of how
the quality of mini-grant projects might be measured. The
Committee felt that this was not the job of the Committee, and
that the Deans of individual applicants would be the appropriate
entities to evaluate the projects.
The monies available for mini-grants have not been fully used in
recent years, but interest and the number of applications is
growing. If in the future the applications for grants exceed monies
available, the Committee will proceed on a first-to-be-approved
basis. The Committee will not become involved in the evaluation
of the project outcomes.
Lastly, regarding mini-grants, the Committee decided that the fact
that an application was essentially recycled from a previous year
did not of itself invalidate the application. However, the Committee
reaffirmed mini-grant funds needed to be used for projects
beneficial to the community.
2011-2012
The Professional Development Committee instructed the Office of
Faculty Development to adhere to these guidelines with respect to
the timely review of packets submitted by award nominees and
applicants for professional development leave or mini-grants.
Specifically, once a threshold of reviews/evaluations has been
completed by the committee members, then the following
timelines must be followed:
No additional accomplishments were realized during this 2011 –
2012 year.
The decision was made by the Faculty Professional Development
Committee that the Faculty Achievement Award be for both the
first place and the second runner up from the Minnie Stevens
Piper Professor.
A decision was made to evaluate the Adjunct Faculty and Minnie
Stevens Piper Awards online. This coming year will be a pilot run
meant to see if the former method of having copies of each
application sent to each individual campus should be replaced or
not.
Evaluate Adjunct Faculty Awards. Evaluate Minnie Stevens Piper
Awards. Assist in putting together the faculty and staff recognition
event held at the El Paso Club. Recommend to approve faculty
leave. Recommend to approve faculty mini-grants.
If a threshold number of committee members have not reviewed
the materials by the original deadline then the Faculty
Development Office can extend the deadline. The deadline will be
extended in two day increments until the threshold number is
reached. If the extended deadline is not feasible, then the
Chairman of the Faculty Professional Development Committee in
conjunction with the Faculty Development Office will decide upon
an appropriate course of action.
The decision was made by the Faculty Professional Development
Committee that the same order of the folder presentation for the
Adjunct Faculty Achievement award be the same as the one that
is used for the Minnie Stevens Piper Professor Award for
organization, fairness, and consistency.
2010-2011
The position of Lecturer was officially established as eligible for
the Adjunct Faculty Award.
The decision was made to conduct interviews with faculty
regarding leave applications, if these are determined to be in
need of clarification. A subcommittee is to be formed that will then
report to the entire committee.
OFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT OF RESEARCH AND ACCOUNTABILITY
H:RS/Reports2014-2015/2014-2015CmteChairsAnnualImprovementRptFacultyProfessionalDev.docx
EPCC does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, gender, age, disability, veteran status, sexual orientation, or gender identity.
8/19/15
Page 2 of 3
Academic
Year
2009-2010
I. Response to last Year’s Chair’s recommended Plan
of Action
II. Recommendations and Receiving Administrator(s)
III. Recommended Plan of Action (e.g. Objectives) for
the Committee during the next Academic Year
[Not requested]
To Dr. Eileen Conklin
1.
2.
3.
4.
Evaluate the criteria for adjunct faculty awards - the lecturer
position has no definitive category.
Recommendations are in progress regarding the faculty’s
interpretation of the faculty and staff leave definitions
2008-2009
[Not requested]
To Dr. Eileen Conklin:
 This committee is vital and functional in the support and
acknowledgement of the facility with outstanding
accomplishments.
 The mini grant procedure was reviewed and approved, sending
the proposed procedure to Dr. Brown.
 The committee approved an application form and suggested
naming it the Faculty Professional Development Mini-Grant
Application Form.
The committee suggested that a workshop on mini-grants be
presented during Faculty Development Week.
Evaluate adjunct faculty awards.
Evaluate part-time faculty awards.
Evaluate Minnie Stevens Piper faculty nominations.
Assist in putting together the faculty and staff recognition event
held at the El Paso Club each May.
5. Recommend to approve faculty leave.
6. Recommend to approve faculty mini grants.
7. Subcommittee to continue its work to establish clearer
definitions of faculty short-term leave.
Review charge of committee and participation responsibility for
each member to ensure active committee involvement and to
increase committee effectiveness.
Review timelines for awards as well as getting more faculty and
students involved in process.
Promote mini-grants more heavily—consider ways to market
them.
Revisit discussion on procedure for evaluating award packets.
Follow up on whether or not PD Leave can be given for calendar
or academic year and make a specific recommendation to the
administration.
Consider reviewing and determining criteria for awarding Faculty
Development credit for consistency. Also consider possible
impact on Program Review and the logging of training in the
Centralized Repository.
2007-2008
[Not requested]
To Dr. Eileen Conklin:
 This committee is vital and functional in the support and
acknowledgement of the facility with outstanding
accomplishments.
 The mini grant procedure was reviewed and approved, sending
the proposed procedure to Dr. Brown.
 The committee approved an application form and suggested
naming it the Faculty Professional Development Mini-Grant
Application Form.
The committee suggested that a workshop on mini-grants be
presented during Faculty Development Week.
2006-2007
[Not requested]
To Dr. Eileen Conklin:
 This committee is very functional and productive.
 During the present year, the committee has begun to revise
certain policies/procedures such as the mini-grant procedure, and
has also standardized the announcement forms for the awards.
It has been recommended that the award packets be copied and
distributed at one Dean's office per Dr. Eileen Conklin campus so
as to facilitate the committee's review. This would provide
committee members with more time to review and rate the
packets.
OFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT OF RESEARCH AND ACCOUNTABILITY
 Continue the work on refining the mini-grant procedure.
 Consider developing a Committee member training program or a
handbook for committee members. This will allow committee
members to learn more about award packets and award criteria
prior to the first review.
 Development of the Faculty Development Week presentations,
on a regular basis.
 Continue to encourage committee members to review packets in
a timely manner.
 Consider developing a standardized packet, one which allows
the packets and the evaluation form to be in line with one
another.
The work of this committee could not be done if it were not for the
assistance of May Beth Haan and the professional direction of Dr.
Eileen Conklin. The information they provide is invaluable to the
committee.
 The plan of action for next year should be to complete the
revision of the mini-grant procedure and the standardization of
other forms.
 The committee should strive to facilitate the review of award
packets so as to increase the time for committee review.
The new chair should strive to encourage new committee
members to learn about the award packet review process and
award criteria prior to the first review.
H:RS/Reports2014-2015/2014-2015CmteChairsAnnualImprovementRptFacultyProfessionalDev.docx
EPCC does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, gender, age, disability, veteran status, sexual orientation, or gender identity.
8/19/15
Page 3 of 3