2013-2014 Summary Report of the Committee on Committees
May 31, 2014
The charge to the Committee on Committees (COC) is to review, on an annual basis, one-third of
the MU standing committees and to make recommendations to the Chancellor and Faculty
Council on the continuation of the committees and the revision of charges and/or membership to
improve the committees’ functions. The COC also follows up on past recommendations for
changes.
The COC met during fall 2013 to review the procedures for evaluation of MU standing
committees. Each COC member agreed to review one standing committee. As part of the review
process, each committee member attended a meeting of his/her assigned committee (when
possible) and requested that the committee chair and members complete a survey about their
roles and responsibilities as well as the functioning and value of the committee itself. (A sample
copy of the survey and letter to campus committee chairs are available for review on the COC
page on the MU Standing Committees’ website). Each COC member analyzed the results from
the surveys associated with his/her assigned committee and then prepared a report and overall
recommendation about the continuation of the assigned committee.
The COC reviewed the following committees for 2013-2014:
 Campus Mediation Committee
 Committee on Committees
 Family Friendly Committee
 Lecture Committee
 Library Committee
 Revision of Student Records Committee
 Student Financial Aid Committee
 Student Conduct Committee
 Traffic Appeals Committee
A description of the charges of the reviewed committees, the individual reports prepared by COC
members, and an overall COC recommendation for each committee follow.
Committee Reviews
Campus Mediation Committee
Committee Charge: The charge to the Campus Mediation Service Committee is to act as an
independent oversight body for the Campus Mediation Service, including setting policy for the
Campus Mediation Service and overseeing the director of the Campus Medication Service and
the Campus Mediation Service operations.
Review Comments: Survey results from committee members showed that the committee is
providing a useful function and meeting their charge.
Strengths identified by committee members included:
1




All the members listen to ideas under discussion;
All the members are committed to the work;
All the members’ ideas are valued and discussed;
Members include personnel from human resources who know employment law and
policies.
Areas for improvement identified by committee members included:
 Some would like to see a better list of expectations so they know what they should
accomplish.
 Some indicated they do not know all the members of the committee or their roles.
Based on the survey of committee members it seems that this committee functions well and
meets its charge. Although most responses were positive, the following suggestions were
provided to enhance future productivity and efficiency.
 Some felt the committee did not spread its work assignments equitably among members.
 Some were not aware of available resources, while others did not feel there were
adequate resources.
 Some did not think committee members’ individual responsibilities are clear.
Recommendation: The COC recommends continuation of this committee.
Committee on Committees
Committee Charge: The charge to the Committee on Committees is to review on an annual basis
one-third of the standing committees and to make recommendations to the Chancellor and
Faculty Council on the continuation of the committees and the revision of charges and/or
membership to improve the committees' functions. The committee also should follow-up on past
recommendations for changes.
Review Comments: For the last several years the COC has upheld its charge and reviewed a
portion of all campus committees. This has led to some changes to MU committees, which is a
positive outcome from the perspective of the COC. The move to using web-based surveys by the
COC has improved the overall committee review process. This move has been made possible by
COC faculty membership. If this support could be transitioned to staff it would be sustainable.
Student members have not regularly attended the COC meetings in the past, and this should be
addressed.
Recommendation: The COC recommends continuation of this committee.
Family Friendly Committee
Committee Charge: The charge to the Family Friendly Committee is to review and recommend
policies to the Vice Chancellor for the issues facing students, staff and faculty with familial
responsibilities on the campus.
2
Review Comments: At this time, the University has no means to know exactly, or even
approximately, the number of staff, students and faculty that have child or elder care
responsibilities. How many people are involved? The types of needs represented? Personal costs
incurred? Compromises to work or educational activities, etc. The Family Friendly Committee
spent a considerable amount of time putting together a survey proposal on MU Child Care Needs
and the survey results were sent to the Chancellor on April 29th, 2014. The survey included
responses from 1267 individuals, containing responses from 325 undergraduate students, 247
graduate students, 514 professional staff members and 181 faculty members.
In addition to conducting the MU Child Care Needs survey, the Family Friendly Committee
worked on writing Family Friendly syllabi language and other communication materials. The
committee met several times in the fall and spring semesters.
Recommendation: The COC recommends continuation of this committee.
Lecture Committee
Committee Charge: The charge to the Lectures Committee is to work with the Office of the
Provost to establish and coordinate an annual series of lectures dealing with cultural, scientific
and public affairs subject matter.
Review Comments:
Committee members felt that the committee meets its charge. They identified committee
strengths such as diverse membership, efficiency in responding to lecture applications, a clear
mandate, and concrete results that directly serve the central mission of the university. Several
committee members commented that the budget should increase as one member argued, “The
Budget for the Lectures Committee has not increased sufficiently as costs have risen.” One
committee member suggested that the members could be more critical of lecture proposals. This
comment suggests the committee may want to examine the review criteria used for selection of
future lectures.
Recommendation: The COC recommends continuation of this committee.
Library Committee
Committee Charge: The charge to the Library Committee is to make recommendations to the
provost concerning the continued improvement of the library collection and library services, and
academic matters related to library policies and programs.
Review Comments: The Library Committee meets monthly and has an active, engaged
membership. Committee membership lauded the job of the Committee Chair and Library
Director. A major issue of discussion this past year had been the mold damage discovered in an
MU library depository. Additional library facility related issues are regularly discussed.
Committee members suggest that the charge to the Library Committee should be expanded to
include a specific focus on developing recommendations related to fiscal issues for the library. A
3
suggested, revised scope provided by the committee is: The charge of the Library Committee is
to make recommendations to the provost concerning the continued improvement of the library
collection and library services and their financial support, and academic matters related to library
policies and programs.
Recommendations: The COC recommends continuation of this committee. Revise the
committee charge to include “financial support” as suggested by the committee.
Revision of Student Records Committee
Committee Charge: The charge to the Revision of Student Records Committee is to receive and
to act upon petitions for revisions in entries concerning grades and credits entered into the
official academic record.
Review Comments: The Revision of Student Records meets once a month. In between meetings,
the group is provided with documentation of the cases that will be discussed. The committee is
held to a high level of confidentiality, which the reviewer felt it upholds. Members on the
committee come from a diverse range of perspectives from across the campus. It was noted that
Victor Price, the ex-officio member of the committee, does a great job in his role and is
extremely efficient and self-organized. From the meeting that the reviewer attended and from
comments on the survey, it was apparent the members of this committee take their responsibility
very seriously.
Recommendation: The COC recommends continuation of this committee.
Student Financial Aid Committee
Committee Charge: The charge to the Student Financial Aid Committee is to make
recommendations to the provost regarding the MU Student Financial Aid program, including the
awarding and dispensing of gifts, loans, work aid and the operation of campus aid programs such
as the scholarship and student work programs. The committee also assists in developing special
programming and proposes guidelines for new scholarship programs.
Review Comments: The Student Financial Aid Committee meets once a year and as needed for
appeal hearings. The committee is needed to be compliant with NCAA rules and serves as a
safeguard for fair and unbiased treatment of students in general and student-athletes in particular.
Recommendation: The COC recommends continuation of this committee.
Student Conduct Committee
Committee Charge: The charge to the Student Conduct Committee is to decide cases in
accordance with the University of Missouri Standards of Conduct and Rules of Procedures in
student disciplinary matters and to report those recommendations to the Provost or to the Vice
Chancellor for Student Affairs.
4
Recommendation: The Committee Chair was not responsive to requests for the review.
Therefore, the COC recommends that this committee be reviewed during the 2014-15 academic
year.
Traffic Appeals Committee
Committee Charge: The charge to the Traffic Appeals Committee is to make recommendations
to the Vice Chancellor for Administrative Services regarding appeals made by persons charged
with a University Police traffic violation.
Review Comments: The Chair stated that the committee met only for third stage appeals at the
end of the semester. At the third stage students have to meet with the committee in person. The
Chair assigns three members of the committee to vote on the appeal. Four of the six committee
members responded to the survey. All felt the Traffic Appeals Committee functioned well with a
mix of virtual meetings at the initial stages of an appeal and a face-to-face meeting at the final
stage.
Recommendation: The COC recommends continuation of this committee.
Respectfully submitted by:
Kathryn Chval, Chair
Kathy Schmidtke Felts
Bonnie Gregg
Brian Houston
Kim Humphrey
Luis Polo Parada
Alpana Ray
Richard Wilson
The committee would like to thank Linda Kaufman for all of her support of the committee’s
work.
5