Thursday, December 2, 2010
3:15 PM to 5:00 PM, Gwynn Room, A 221
In attendance: (President) Mike Gavin, (Vice President) Rosanne Benn; (delegates) Charlie
Thomas – IET; Scott Huxel – Math; Mark Hubley – PLT; Kathi Linville – Nursing; Danny Jones
– At-large; Sadra Thomas – Learning Foundations; Len Sekelick – Liberal Arts; Laura Ellsworth
– Public Safety and Law; Sherry Kinslow – Social Sciences; Barbara Engh – Nursing; Jean
McEvoy – Library; Barry Berube – Health, Nutrition, and Physical Education; Nancy Meeman –
Allied Health; Janet Carlson – Learning Foundations; Michelle Klein – STEM/Sciences and
Engineering; Nicole Ives – Liberal Arts; Eldon Baldwin – At-large; Beth Adkins – Student
Development Services; Vince Cipriani – WDCE; Alan Mickelson – At-large.

The meeting called to order at 3:25 pm.

The agenda for the 12/2/10 meeting was approved.

The minutes from the 11/18/10 meeting were approved.

Faculty Organization Bylaws (amendment to purpose section sent out via email for 11/18 meeting)
“Philosophy of education” has replaced “learning centeredness” in the faculty organization bylaws. The bylaws were accepted as amended.

Emeritus Faculty Proposal Status Proposal
Alan Mickelson indicated that the document now reflects the suggestions that the Senate made about the document. Related to the approval process, Dr. Dukes (and future presidents) will be able to nominate a candidate for emeritus status. “College service” has been removed from the criteria for consideration. The motion for the emeritus status was approved unanimously and has been placed as an addendum to these minutes.

Reports:
A.
Senate President
Mike Gavin gave an update on the confidentiality agreement and pointed out that Cheryl Dover requested an update from Lark Dobson. Dobson’s response to Dover was to say that the agreement should be signed and handed it “sometime.” Gavin said that the Faculty Senate should have a response by the end of the semester related to the letter Gavin submitted on behalf of the Senate concerning the confidentiality agreement.

B.
Senate Vice President
Regarding the Salary and Benefits Committee, Rosanne Benn spoke of a meeting that she had with Tom Knapp. During the meeting, Knapp indicated that he is not philosophically opposed to the notion of the proposal concerning salary improvements. Knapp requested input from the
Salary and Benefits Committee regarding what to do with a sum of money, were such funds for salary improvements to become available, in other words, what the faculty’s point of view is on how to disburse such funds. Benn pointed out that the Salary and Benefits Committee will keep the proposal as it was submitted. Danny Jones asked whether there is some sum of money to become available. Benn responded that the money is not a special amount, rather that Knapp will work up some numbers to see what might be possible. Gavin noted that the “control point” was not previously used. The question of what to do with any amount of money available would be whether to follow the Kendricks’ study or the salary and benefits committee. Benn noted that there is no long-term plan at this point. It would be too late to implement any sort of plan for the coming year. Benn noted that Knapp found it unlikely with furloughs in the county that there will be any raise for the college. Benn said she would have information from Knapp next week.
Mickelson asked about Knapp’s feelings on funds to become available. Benn replied that Knapp felt that it would be possible but neither likely nor unlikely that the funds would come through.
Benn noted that 3% was the amount referred to. Jones said that the college would have had to know where the funds would come from to refer to any percentage. Sherry Kinslow asked an accounting question about how funds could be used and how stringent the process is. Mickelson answered that he believed that the budget could be used in ways unanticipated. Jones replied that he does not believe that money set aside for raises can be used for other costs such as new hires. Gavin spoke about meetings that he is to have with Dukes. Gavin commented that he felt that the college’s take on salaries is reactive rather than proactive. Janet Carlson commented that the college always seems to be reactive. Mickelson and Carlson commented that when the Board of Trustees accepted the Hendricks’ report, the willingness to follow the guidelines was implicit.
Eldon Baldwin spoke of how changes in the state and county budgets can lead to specific guidelines from the County Executive and County Council and that there can be restrictions placed on how the money is used. Several Senate members spoke of changes on the County
Council due to elections and term limits. Between these changes and the economy, Baldwin felt that the College is not holding its breath for anything. As far as retirements go, Benn indicated that there are just a couple of people who have submitted paperwork to retire. The incentive/disincentive package may have an impact on how many people decide to retire. There is no way to predict how many
C.
College-wide Forum (L.Ellsworth)
Laura Ellsworth spoke about the Executive Committee and the proposal concerning the natatorium. Concerning the Office of Professional Development, Alan Mickelson noted that
Heidi Elam will give a presentation before the Forum concerning professional development.
Ellsworth referred to updates from the Traffic Appeals Committee. Related to the “Core
Competencies,” five of them have already gone to senior team and president. Hiring and evaluations will be on the agenda as informational items.

H. Adjunct Faculty
Janet Carlson noted that the meeting this past Monday was cancelled and that she will meet with
Dr. Dunnington next week. Carlson will continue to teach a hybrid course at PGCC in the spring
2011 semester and will continue to attend Senate meetings.

Old Business
Gavin will be handing in five of the seven sections of the Bylaws to Mara Doss for them to be posted. Charlie Thomas, Nancy Meeman, and Gavin looked at changes, looked for academic freedom chapter Jean McEvoy said that there is a copy of the Bylaws in the library at the reference desk. Mickelson commented that he is not so sure that there have not been changes. Baldwin pointed out that there is a line is the Code that does clarify the matter.

Meeting adjourned at 4:05 pm.
[Proposal for Emeritus Status as passed by Faculty Senate on 12/02/10 follows.]

Prince George’s Community College
Emeritus Status Committee
Emeritus Proposal
[Combined Administrative and Faculty Edits]
The granting of emeritus/a status by an institution of higher learning benefits both the recipient of the honorific title and the institution conferring the title. The faculty and administrators benefit by having an institutional home and an academic identity that is often necessary to possess when they wish to present at conferences – papers, workshops, seminars, and keynote addresses - and to apply to publish scholarly articles and books. Frequently, even attendance at such conferences requires the currency of an academic institutional identity.
Likewise, the colleges and universities that confer emeritus/a status to worthy faculty and administrators have their names connected to those individuals who present and publish, and thus acquire the credit and prestige that redound to them by this nexus. For example, when a textbook is published by an emeritus/a faculty or administrator, the institution’s name conferring that status is listed with the author’s or editor’s name on each book, which may be used nationwide for many years.
Emeritus/a status is awarded for the recognition of merit for many years of outstanding, distinguished, and honorable service to Prince George’s Community College.
Privileges and benefits may be provided to the honored faculty and administrators because of their longstanding service rendered to the college.
I. Criteria
The following criteria must be met by retired full-time faculty members and full-time administrators to be granted the honorific title of emeritus or emerita:
Faculty
1.
The candidate has officially retired and his/her retirement has been accepted by his/her immediate line supervisor (ILS) and the appropriate vice president.
2.
The candidate must have a minimum length of full-time service with Prince George’s
Community College of no fewer than twenty years. The candidate must demonstrate excellence in teaching/primary responsibility, exemplary service to the department and/or the college, college service, significant contributions to college-wide committees and task forces, and significant professional development. Evidence, is required, but not a portfolio. Any candidate who has been awarded either the
President’s Medal or the Faculty Senate Excellence Award within the past two years is exempt from this one criterion.
3.
The candidate must have served the college for 20 years and have attained the rank of associate professor. [Alternate: The candidate must have earned the rank of professor or have earned the rank of associate professor and served the college for 22 years.]
Administrators

1.
The candidate has officially retired and his/her retirement has been accepted by his/her immediate supervisor and the appropriate member of the senior team.
2.
The candidate must have a minimum length of full-time service with Prince George’s
Community College of no fewer than twenty (20) years.
3.
The candidate must have demonstrated the following in his/her capacity as an administrator: (a) excellence in leadership, (b) exemplary performance of administrative tasks and duties, and (c) membership in and significant contributions to college-wide committees and task forces. Exemplary service must be recent and ongoing.
II. Review Process
The review process for faculty or administrator emeritus status is divided into three stages: nomination, recommendation, and approval.
Nomination
1.
Supervisor nomination.
The immediate supervisor can nominate an individual by completing the Emeritus Nomination Form and providing a narrative statement describing how the nominee meets criterion #3.
OR
2.
Self-Nomination.
The individual can nominate himself/herself by completing the
Emeritus Nomination Form and providing a narrative statement describing how he/she meets criterion #3. The nomination form and narrative are submitted to his/her supervisor.
AND
The letters of nomination must be accompanied by supporting documentation that speaks to the nominee’s distinguished, meritorious, and honorable service.
Recommendation
The Emeritus nomination form, narrative statement, and documentation are reviewed, in order, by the nominee’s immediate supervisor, dean, and vice president, as applicable.
Each reviewer indicates “recommend” or “does not recommend” on the nomination form, signs the form, and sends it to the next reviewer. The vice president forwards the form, narrative statement, and documentation of required criteria to the president of the college.

Approval
1.
The president of the college approves or disapproves the nomination and notifies the
Board of Trustees of this decision.
[Note: The following was not included in the administration proposal. Also, the president may nominate any retired faculty member or administrator for emeritus status to the Board for approval for good cause..
[Explanatory Note for the above: Dr. Dukes remarks:”What does this mean? I believe all who are deemed worthy of this status must be nominated, even if I am the nominator.”] [This statement is intended to provide the president of the college the authority to recommend a full-time faculty member or a member of the administration for emeritus status who may, for a reason that the committee cannot anticipate, not meet all of the requirements for emeritus status, but, in the opinion of the president of the college is worthy of this recognition. If the president is to nominate, to whom would the nomination be sent for approval and who, besides the Board of Trustees, would disapprove such a nomination?]
2 Emeritus/a status should not be confused in any way with faculty promotion or tenure, or administrative promotion. The president shall determine the number of persons, if any, to whom this status may be awarded annually; and may, due to cause or financial exigency, retract any and all benefits accrued as a result of awarding of such status.
3 The Board of Trustees approves or disapproves the award of emeritus/a status of the nominee(s).
III. Benefits
Faculty and administrators who acquire emeritus/a status will receive the following benefits:
1.
Their names will be listed in the college catalog and other official publications containing the names of the college’s faculty.
2.
They will retain certain campus privileges, including faculty and staff parking permits, use of the library, the natatorium and other facilities, and participation in the
Speaker’s Bureau.
3.
They will be invited to participate in ceremonies and cultural events on campus.
4.
They will retain a college e-mail address.
5.
They will be provided with business cards, if desired.
6.
They will be compensated an additional 5% for teaching classes as members of the adjunct faculty.