Thomas W. and Robin W. Edwards
College of Humanities and Fine Arts
Fall Faculty Meeting
January 7, 2016
___________________________________
Approval of Minutes - A motion was made by Steve Madden to approve the October 23, 2015
minutes and seconded by Aneilya Barnes. The motion passed unanimously.
New Faculty – The Provost identified unused slots in other administrative and academic areas
late in the fall semester, and COHFA was awarded three slots for mid-year searches. As of this
date, two teaching associates have been awarded a contract.

Brian “Cat” Taylor, Lecturer, Visual Arts

Victoria Lozano, Lecturer, English
Faculty Welfare Motion on Compensation - Pam Martin and Dan Turner presented the
proposed revisions to the Coastal faculty compensation plan. The document was emailed
previously to the faculty. We are in the last year of the three-year plan that is based essentially
on retention. We did not fulfill the last year of the plan because we did not meet our goal this
year. However, the Board of Trustees passed in the December meeting a .5% raise and gave us
$400,000 decompression. A Cost of Living raise was not awarded this year. If you made under
$100,000 and have been employed in the State a certain amount of months, an $800, one-time,
bonus was awarded. When a faculty member’s salary is compressed, decompression is based on
the national average CUPA salary and then the University takes off 2.5% for Cost of Living in
our area. Pam used the example that if you make $60,000/year and your salary is $65,000 on the
national average, take 2.5% off, and the employee is compressed approximately $4,000. With
the current plan, CCU has to be competitive and in order to be decompressed at 100%, you also
have to be ranked meritorious. This means you have to be in the top 30% of your department. In
order to earn 2.5% under the national average you have to be both meritorious and be
competitive, which is assistant/associate/full up to six years and then awarded an exceptional
post-tenure review. Lecturers have been included in the current plan; however, Pam indicated
that it is unclear exactly how lecturers are covered on a consistent and coherent basis across the
campus.
Pam reviewed the proposed plan. The committee surveyed other universities, took a six-year
cost analysis of compression over the CUPA data of every college of every CIP code, and looked
at other peer aspirant universities. The committee was very thorough and looked at everything
remotely related. The result is a three part plan: 1) Cost of Living from the State awarded when
approved by the State Legislature. 2) Rank-Based Performance Decompression - Pam explained
that the committee is proposing that salary decompression should be available to all faculty that
meet the eligibility as outlined in the plan. Under the Decompression category, there is a small
merit award included because there are some members of the University that are not compressed.
The determination would be based on the most recent three years of performance and the
colleges would determine the standards to merit. 3) Promotion and Tenure Adjustments to
Salary - It will be determined either by a dollar amount or a percentage of salary, whichever is
higher, and will be added to the base pay.
The next step is the presentation of the proposed plan to Faculty Senate at the February meeting
for endorsement and approval. It is important that the plan is supported by the faculty when
given to the Provost. It is a recommendation and will be out of the Committee’s hands once
given to the Provost. The Board of Trustees must approve a compensation plan.
College Promotion Standards and Departmental Elaborations
Dan announced that it is time to take a new look at the college promotion standards document
that covers the whole college. What follows is the individual departments reviewing/revising
their departmental elaborations. The Faculty Manual only talks about college promotion and
tenure standards. Our college covers a wide variety of disciplines and the elaborations are the
disciplinary specific manifestation of those standards. The college has a generalized and
somewhat abstract standard, below that standard is the individual disciplines, i.e. art, music,
English, etc. For example, the college standard talks about effective teaching, but the way
effective teaching is actually demonstrated and documented will vary by discipline. Dan
indicated that there is beginning to be too much ambiguity between some department documents
and the college standard, and the college standard has not been reviewed for several years.
During January/February a review of the college document is planned. The Dean and the Peer
Review Committee will review and draft revisions, the Chairs will review and endorse, and the
revisions will be presented/discussed at the spring mid-semester meeting of COHFA on March 4.
The Dean does not anticipate major changes that would change the fundamental nature of the
college standards. Therefore, he requested the Chairs begin the conversation with their faculty
about their department elaborations. Some departments may only need a few revisions, updates,
etc. However, there are departments that really need to start-over and look at what they want to
be valorized as well as to ensure that their elaborations articulate carefully with the college
standards. Discussion followed with examples of the areas of concern that need addressed and
revised within the department document. By the end of the semester, Dr. Ennis would like the
department elaborations to be revised. If a department needs more than a semester, the college
standard is the primary document.
COHFA Planning Document – Holley Tankersley explained that the revised document is not
that different from the one presented at the October faculty meeting, and the minor changes are
highlighted in yellow. She explained the process for the creation of the document that began in
the spring 2015. A representative from each department in COHFA and a member of the
contingent faculty held several meetings during the spring semester and worked on the document
at the college level. The representatives returned to their departments for further discussion and
input. The document was assembled and sent back/forth via email during the summer and this
fall the committee resumed and incorporated the feedback from departments and individual
faculty for the final document being presented at this meeting.
The first section outlines the college commitments. These are affirmative statements of things
the College will commit to as teachers and scholars and good public servants of the institution.
Section II is the college-wide initiatives. Each goal listed is accompanied by action items. The
Goals and Action Items tie back to the commitments, specifically. Section III contains the
department plans. The committee did not revise the plans and they stand as submitted by each
department. Section IV contains measurable targets and metrics for departmental performance.
These are averaged and projected out to 2019. The final section is basically a request to establish
a standing, permanent planning committee comprised of one member from each department and
a representative from the contingent faculty. It is recommended that the committee review the
plan, and make the necessary adjustment on an annual basis.
Dan commented that the committee will need to consistently and regularly take the plan and
checklist it. Budgeting decisions will have to be made with an eye on the plan. Each Chair
submits a budget for their department which will need to be accordance with their department
plan. Lastly, there is the hiring component. Dan pointed out that when we request positions to
the Provost, we will need to ask ourselves if they reflect the priorities of the plan we claim to
support, and are we distributing the resources internally based on the values and priorities that
we are now endorsing.
Holley noted that the creation of the Planning document was an extremely positive process. She
expressed how extremely lucky we are to be a part of this college and to have so many
colleagues who care so much about what we do and how we do it.
Steve Madden moved for acceptance of the plan, Pam Martin seconded, and the motion passed
unanimously.
Announcements

This fall, Tripthi picked up the leadership of the QEP initiative of the prior year. She
has put together a full agenda of Fulbright visitors, who will be presenting lectures
and meeting with students. Dan encouraged the faculty to put these sessions into
their schedules and to encourage their classes to attend. The Dean noted the
importance of our academic community welcoming these visitors and making it a
rewarding experience. The Fulbright visitors and their lectures are being promoted
internally, and next year the PR will be integrated into the Cultural Arts Calendar.

Michael Ruse informed the faculty that this semester he will be meeting with each
department to finalize the Honors requirements that majors will need to complete.
This will be for inclusion in the 2017 catalog and will take effect at the same time the
new Core will be in place.

Ellen announced that the annual COHFA Confab will be held on February 12. This is
the mini-conference held each year on student learning sponsored by the COHFA
Assessment and Student Learning Committee. A call for proposals will be
forthcoming. Dan noted it was remarkable the number of departments that received
outstanding feedback and praise for their assessment plans from the university-wide
Assessment and Student Learning Committee.

An animation short film entitled Balance followed the meeting.
Submitted by: Judy Davis