MINUTES
Governance Committee Meeting
25 August 2009
Present: Patricia Brennan, Gray Crouse, Yayoi Everett, Vialla Hartfield-Mendez, Peter
Hoeyng, Cora MacBeth, Donna Maney, Elissa Marder, Julia Kjelgaard, Patricia Whitten,
Eric Weeks, Holly York
Ex-officio: Robert A. Paul, Dean
Absent: Mark Ravina
Administrative Support: Brenda Azzarelli-Crosby
Patricia Whitten called the meeting to order.
1. Approval of Minutes
Minutes from the May 6, 2009 meeting were approved unanimously.
2. Appointment of Secretary
Julia Kjelgaard volunteered to be recording secretary for the committee and for faculty
meetings.
3. Selection of Social Science Representative to the University Senate
Brenda Azzarelli-Crosby provided background information to the ending of George
Engelhard’s term on the University Senate in the summer of 2009, rather than 2010 as
previously thought. Because of the special circumstances of the administrative error, the
GOVCOM is empowered to appoint a Social Science representative for a one-year term.
At the end of this appointment, the position will go back on the ballot for the next
scheduled election cycle.
Suggestions were solicited for the replacement. Patricia Whitten will take any suggested
names and begin a short list of candidates. She will contact the candidates until she finds
a replacement. Suggestions for soliciting additional candidates included contacting
previous representatives and department chairs in Social Sciences for nominations. A
clarification was made that the faculty senate representative also has responsibilities as a
faculty council representative.
4. Selection of a Gov COM representative to the CIPA Committee
Viala Hartfield-Mendez graciously volunteered to be the GOVCOM representative to the
CIPA committee because of her special interest in study abroad programs.
5. Discussion of Communication between Emory College and the Graduate School.
Eric Weeks introduced the topic of possible discussions with the Dean of the Graduate
School by the GOVCOM. Questions were asked about the percentage the College is
paying of graduate stipends, leverage, and funding issues. It was pointed out that the
Graduate School Advisory Committee is currently trying to re-structure, so it is perhaps
is a good time to initiate discussion.
Issues of conflicts that are being felt within the College faculty who are designated
Graduate School faculty, and those College faculty not specifically designated Graduate
faculty were raised. A discussion followed about how the designated Graduate faculty in
the College consider their dual roles and their “ voice or lack of voice” within the
Graduate School. Gray Crouse clarified the traditional separation, and the fact that many
Graduate School faculty are not part of the College. It was suggested that it is time for
College/Graduate School faculty to have a clear voice within the Graduate School. Dean
Paul stated that there are currently ongoing talks between the Graduate School and the
College.
The structure of the Graduate School, and progress that might be made in recognition of
this particular body of faculty was discussed. A question of whether a body needs to be
constituted to represent this group of faculty was raised. In a far ranging discussion
about the identification of this group, and the further development of their influence, the
question of the jurisdiction of the GOVCOM to address this issue was raised.
As a beginning step, a suggestion was made to invite Lisa Tedesco and Mark Risjord to a
GOVCOM meeting as soon as possible, this semester, to begin a dialogue. Issues that
faculty would like to have addressed include both structural and constituency questions.
Questions were raised, whether we could imagine a College Standing committee that
deals with the College/Graduate School faculty, and how the interface would work.
Recent instances of graduate student stipends being cut in the fourth year was brought up
and discussed. Cora MacBeth pointed out that in Chemistry the graduate students are
only on stipend for one year and then put on grants. A question was posed, whether a
member of Directors of Graduate Studies Committee or a member of the Graduate
School Executive Council should be invited to sit on the GOVCOM as an Ex officio
member.
A proposal was made to initiate a first meeting with Lisa Tedesco and Mark Risjord to
open lines of communication. Additional questions surfaced including why the structure
is as it is. Discussion followed about whether to solicit questions from the College
faculty to address to Lisa Tedesco. It was decided that for the first discussion, the
GOVCOM would self generate a series of questions.
Lisa Tedesco and Mark Risjord will be invited to join the committee at our September
30th meeting, if possible, and if necessary we will schedule an additional meeting of the
GOV COM this semester.
Dean Paul made a point that the College currently pays for the actual graduate students,
so the more we place graduate student stipends on grants, that is a real benefit to the
College. Currently all faculty should be encouraged to increase the support of graduate
students by grants as this directly saves money for the College. Requiring graduate
students to write grants, and putting graduate students on grants will reinforce new
incentives that will be offered by the College to encourage grant writing.
6. Question about bringing P.E. question to the Faculty
Gray Crouse raised the question whether GOVCOM will pursue bringing the P.E. credit
issue to a faculty vote this year, as suggested by the GOVCOM last spring. A suggestion
was made to put it on the next meeting agenda and to invite Dean Joanne Brzinski to the
meeting. Dean Brzinski had also requested to talk to the GOVCOM about the success of
the new advising program.
7. Discussion of classification of departments within divisions
In relationship to committees and nominations, a question was raised about whether
faculty should be allowed to decide their own classifications. The example was based on
a conversation with a faculty member in Women’s Studies whose interdisciplinary
approaches cross over the divisions in the College. She felt her ties were more closely
aligned to another division, than the one to which Women’s Studies is assigned.
Eric Weeks noted that if the GOV COM committee wanted to make changes, it would
require a change in the by-laws. That led to a question of why we have categories, and
whether self-identification negates divisional interests or knowledge. Yayoi Everett
advanced the idea that heavily interdisciplinary departments such as Women’s Studies
are perhaps special circumstances and Donna Maney discussed the interdisciplinary
nature of Psychology. The question was raised whether there is anything to be gained by
changing the abilities of individual faculty to self identify outside of their departmental
designation.
Dean Paul suggested the only place that this has impact is within governance and the
committees. The point of the divisional requirements of representation was to insure
diversity, and it does so adequately. It was agreed in conversation that it was wise to
table this.
Patricia Whitten adjourned the meeting.