Minutes of Senate Meeting
Tuesday, March 26 th , 2013
Room P019 – Conference Center
Present: Abaza, Abou Oaf, Abou Zeid,Ali, Aly Sh, Amin A, Anderson, Badran, Edel-el, Farag, Ferguson,
Fernandes, Fleita, Fouad, Fox, Gebril, Glavanis, Goneid, Kenney, Habib, Harman, Johnston, Kamel B, Kenney,
Lotfallah, Makhlouf, Maswood,J, Mohamed, Nasrallah, Norman P, Nosseir, Peterson, Peuchaud, Rae, Rafea,
Rashad, Rateb, Runyon, Saady-al, Sawy-El, Sayess S, Shaarawi, Shimi-El, Shoeib, Soliman E, Soliman I, Switzer,
Tutwiler, Zaalouk.
Absent: Amin, Z, Anis, Arnold, Fahmy, Fares, Fiqi El, Galal, Ghazaleh, Hamdy, Hegazy, Kamel S, Lesch,
Macdougall, Mahalawi, Massoud S, Melaney, Motawy, Norman Ch, Parfitt, Parolin, Salah, Salama, Samaha, Sayess
F, Selim, Shawki, Swanson.
Non-senators :Rana Sakr, Dalia saad, George Marquis, Hala Mahmoud, Heba Khalil, Sophie Farag, Nagwa
Kassabgy, Hala Tadros, Hoda Grant, Louise St. Laurant, Laila El- Baradei, Ihab Avierino
Meeting was called to order at 9.38 by Dr. Magdi Nasrallah, Senate Chair.
Opening Remarks by Dr. Magdi Nasrallah:
 Approval of agenda
 Approval of minutes of December Feb 26 th , 2013 senate meeting with minor change.
 Senate Chair commends faculty efforts during the recent visit of the Board of Trustees.
 There will be a forum on Wednesday March 27 th held by three senate committees to discuss student evaluation of instructors in Mary Cross hall from 1pm to 2pm. It is important for faculty and students to attend to discuss concerns.
 There have been a couple of complaints about the noise level during events held at Bartlett Plaza. The music is sometimes too loud. The Student Affairs Committee will be referring that complaint to the university events department.
 The senate retreat is tentatively scheduled for May 18 th . We normally discuss faculty benefits, the handbook and relationship with administration.
Report on Recent Board of Trustees Meeting by President Lisa Anderson
 Trustees had an opportunity to meet with faculty, students, staff and senate, and got a chance to observe events on campus.
 They found the senate lunch valuable
 They had the sense that the faculty were doing well, and they felt a sense of community
 The meeting with the trustees focused on the debate on the budget, the upcoming changes in the core curriculum happening under the Dean of Undergraduate Studies. The board is enthusiastic about those changes.
1

 The trustees meeting next June will focus on student and campus life.
 The report from the student life reviewers came during the visit of the board. This report will be circulated shortly.
 The purpose of the March meeting was the approval of next year’s budget and it was approved. The trustees were concerned about the volatility of the exchange rate and the prospects of inflation. The budget that was last discussed with the senate was approved. It is an austerity budget that is difficult to implement, but responsible in that it does not impair the integrity of the academic mission; it focuses on becoming more efficient on the administration side. The trustees shared concern about the lack of clarity on the economic scene. There will be monthly reports to the board about the impact of the exchange rate and inflation on our budget; these reports will be shared with the senate.
 The chair of the Board of Trustees brought his mom to the Mother’s day celebration.
Statement by Provost Amr Sharaawi:
 Some of us are already feeling the changes that have been done in the advising and registration system. We tried to forecast the need for course offerings and number of sections. The Office of the
Dean of Undergraduate Studies made great effort in looking at freshman courses. Some departments will need to start forecasting their courses, and hopefully this will relieve some of the tensions associated with advising and registration. Some people from the advising center will start discussing forecasting with departments.
 The Board paid attention to enrollment management. We have had a taskforce looking at that for the past 4 months. Their recommendations will be ready by the end of May. This could have implications on how we do admissions, ideas from senate are welcome.
 There has been discussion on elearning, distance learning, and a number of recommendations for universities approaching us for joint degrees. We will put together two taskforces to look at how to approach joint degrees. Lots of universities are starting to do elearning. We must develop a strategy for this, with any changes we make abiding by the rules of Middle States Association and accreditation.
 The independent study policy was discussed last year.
 The change in the fiscal year, and the two months overlap of the two years that resulted from it was discussed with the Executive Committee and the Cabinet. It was decided that an extra two month salary will be paid for people as they leave the university, over and above any retirement benefits.
Questions / Comments:
 Q: The board of trustees approved last year’s budget, including the salary letters. Why are the 2 months salary amount that have been removed from this year as a result of the FY overlap being given at departure, if they were in the approved budget? President: This year we have a 10 month budget.
Last year, salaries were calculated as 10 months. Not everything could be prorated at 10 months – some things were paid in the first 2 months, others will carry on. That is why the two months will be paid at departure.
 Comment: Advising is important but students at registration do not follow advising. They need to do that for planning to be possible.
 Comment: Decisions are taken at the Provost’s Council. Some are implemented without going through the senate, for example the student grievance process and the adjunct faculty issues.
 Provost: There is a minor complication – if someone has had an administrative position then left it, their administrative allowance for tow months will be paid as they leave the position from the current budget, and only their salary will be paid at departure from the university.
2

 Comment: A lot of the effort at advising can be automated – finding gaps between advising and registration. We can achieve quality advising. Provost: This is being done. We are producing a 4 or 5 year plan for each student. When students register, warning colors highlight the gaps. The advisor sees them and directs the student.
 Comment: Advising is a lot more than the mechanical way it is done. Mentorship should be adopted at AUC. Dr. Graham Harman: The senate did pass a mentoring resolution that was not implemented.
Dr. Robert Switzer: CARE council has discussed mentoring, it is in the works. Iman has put together an automated system where the advisor sees what was agreed to last time, and what the student actually took. This allows us to build a model of how students register and fulfill their needs.
 Comment: Regarding the two month issue and financial issues, that discussion needs a larger forum.
Faculty have a lot of unanswered questions. There needs to be a session dedicated to that. Dr. Magdi
Nasrallah: Concerns should be sent to Dr. Brian McDougall. We can have a forum on financial issues.
 Comment: We are doing a good job in helping students select courses, but we need to give students advice on their academic career path. Automation won’t help that.
 Q: What are the external and internal pressures related to elearning? How will the taskforce be involved? Faculty must be involved in the discussions – we need a guarantee from the administration that faculty from all disciplines will be involved. Provost: All taskforces have representatives from most departments. Our taskforces are usually too big. People will be selected in consultation with deans, and based on faculty interest. External pressures come from universities interested in joint degrees, some of them come with funding. What terms do we accept? Will this improve our programs?
 Comment: Given AUC’s nature of face to face instruction, we need a wider faculty discussion of elearning. A taskforce will limit the discussion, and this change will have impact on everyone. We need a wider forum than a taskforce. Provost: If the taskforce comes up with recommendations we can have a forum. President: We can have an e-forum.
Results of 2014-2016 Environment Scan of AUC Presented by Ann Amin
 A SWOT analysis was performed with the purpose of understanding our environment as we make plans for the future.
 Online surveys were conducted to the senate and Senior Administration Group with an 82% response rate
 AUC’s top core strengths identified: facilities, resources, reputation, history, liberal arts curriculum, core values, administration and governance, faculty strength and diversity.
 Areas needing improvement: o Efficiency of governance and administration, o Bureaucracy reduction, o Transparency, o Student accountability o Quality: We are not focused enough on quality, we have academic integrity issues, there needs to be more emphasis on teaching excellence, raising admission standards o Campus Culture: there are concerns about the behavior of faculty and students, lack of respect for rules, absence of spirit o Mission / Planning: We need more focus on core strengths, we are expanding too quickly o Finance / Budget o Commute, isolated location
3

 Challenges External to AUC: o Political issues, security o Economic issues, ability to recruit international students and faculty o Increased competition from universities comparable to AUC o Cultural change o Other o Technological changes – our need to improve online learning
 AUC’s Opportunities, mostly externally focused: o Expand linkages and collaborations o Leverage role as a catalyst for change o Expand outreach o Focus on quality o Increase efficiency
Draft Resolution on Years of Service, Presented by Dr. Mahmoud Farag, Chair of Faculty Affairs
Committee:
Introduction:
A number of faculty are put at a disadvantage as they are unable to accumulate the total years of service when they had interrupted their contract at AUC. Reasons for interruption have varied and some of them are clearly justifiable and should be allowed for. Examples include leave without pay for child care, medical or family reasons and professional development leave.
Proposed Resolution:
With the approval of the department chair and school dean, a faculty member employed on contract basis may receive a leave of absence without pay. Upon return from such leave, the period of service to AUC prior to the leave is added to the faculty member’s cumulative years of service.
 The resolution is to add years of service to the faculty’s record after he goes on leave of absence.
Faculty have had problems adding those years to years of service.
 Questions/Comments:
 President: This is ambiguous. Interruption of contract is different from leave without pay. The first means that the faculty leaves, then comes back on a new contract. Dr. Farag: The leave of absence without pay should allow adding previous years of service. Right now, some faculty have to start their years of service from scratch after coming back from a leave of absence.
 President: I don’t think this is true. It may be an error for some people, but years of service before the leave without pay are being added. It goes without saying. IF there are errors, the Provost’s office should fix that, we do not need a senate resolution. Yvette: This is what happens, the years of service are added.
 Comment: we should have this passage as a policy so people can resort to it as they make their argument. President: Academic Affairs needs to work on the language in the faculty handbook with the Provost, rather than have an independent resolution.
4

 Comments: The reason the Faculty Affairs Committee decided to bring this resolution is because of complaints about years of service not being added; the Provost never received any of these complaints; the interruption of contract is not a legal term, either a person has a contract, or they don’t; one senator knows of an incident where this has happened, and was not resolved in the
Provost’s office.
 Dr. Magdi Nasrallah: The Faculty Affairs Committee should talk to the Provost’s office, and come back with a resolution.
Draft Resolution on Textbooks from Academic Affairs Committee Presented by Dr. Pandeli Glavanis:
Introduction
For students and parents concerned with the rising costs of a college education, textbooks are an unreasonable expense. According to Turn the Page: Making College Textbook s More Affordable, a May 2007 report of the
Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance, textbook costs are a “significant barrier” that prevent some enrolled and potential students from pursuing higher education. Additionally, textbook publishers drive up the cost of textbooks by bundling books with supplemental materials like workbooks that are not used by instructors and frequently publishing new editions with minor updates. Furthermore, the currency exchange rates add to the above problems and make Textbooks sold at AUC quite expensive.
Given the recent events over the cost of tuition Senate should consider seriously ways by which the cost of education at AUC can be rationalized wherever possible. Textbooks is one area which is amenable to such rationalization.
Thus research was conducted on alternatives and the results of this activity are appended to this motion.
The Motion
To cope with rising textbook costs, instructors, bookstores, and libraries must embrace creative solutions. The following are recommended:
1.
The AUC Bookstore must investigate the feasibility of implementing textbook buyback and rental programs.
2.
Instructors must adhere to ethical textbook ordering procedures, like considering more than one textbook publisher and selecting textbooks that will not be revised by the publisher in the near future to enable textbook buyback and rental programs.
3.
The Main Library and Center for Learning and Teaching must take active roles in advocating Open
Educational Resources and advising faculty on how to use them.
4.
The Main Library must continue to advocate the use of Reserves, Electronic Reserves, primary sources, and
Open Access resources and advising faculty on how to use them.
 The purpose of this resolution is to help students with textbook expenses. Universities are trying to reduce the cost of textbooks and recycle. We discussed a textbook buyback system with the bookstore. We encourage faculty to think of alternatives to textbooks.
Questions/Comments:
 Comment: Students are paying 800 to 1000LE per book. He USA is moving toward open education resources, ebooks, textbook rentals. If the library and CLT could offer faculty support, we would be doing students a favor.
5

 Q: Is the library still doing interlibrary loan services and document delivery? A: Yes, only for articles, not for books.
 President: When the senate passes a resolution, the president signs it and it becomes binding. Who is being bound by this resolution? Who is responsible for implementation? Dr. Pandeli: The resolution encourages faculty to think of alternative ways and makes sure the library and bookstore engage in buying back of books. Dr. Magdi Nasrallah: We will take this as a recommendation, not a resolution.
Changes in Core Curriculum: Proposed Changes to Freshman Program Presented by Dr. Carol Clark and Dr. Robert Switzer
 Dr. Robert Switzer: This proposal has been formulated by a taskforce from 2011 consisting of faculty, staff and students, chaired by Dr. Carol Clark and Dr. Khaled Fahmy. The recommended changes are approved by the core program, school councils, and the provost’s council.
 Changes focus on the freshman year. This helps incoming students and places them at the center of learning, provides a scaffolding that will depend on faculty working together with student affairs.
 Dr. Carol Clark presents power point summarizing changes of courses in freshman year.
Questions/Comments:
 Q: It is a good idea to integrate the RHET skills into content based courses. How can this idea be integrated into 300 level courses. What sorts of resources in terms of teaching releases, financial resources and organizational support are available to help with course development? Are TAs available? Dr. Carol Clark: This semester there is an allowance for a one course release for PhD faculty for course development. There is a Mellon Grant from the president to support course development, CLT is providing support, and there is a wiki for faculty orientation.
 Comment: The objectives should include lifelong learning. Maybe some courses should be student-interest led.
 Q: Are there limits on course enrollment? A: For the rhet and tandem courses – 18; for the pathways courses – 20 to 40 students.
 Q: How does the program correspond with English 100 students? How do the Arabic language courses fit in with the first semester? It will be hard to schedule the Arabic courses along with first semester Rhet and Core courses. Dr. Robert Switzer: We really want to integrate Arabic into the program. For English 100, we are moving to develop a bridge program. Right now, there are sections of the old seminar, English 100 students will be able to take credit courses.
 Vote: 92% senate approval of the changes to the core curriculum and the freshman year.
Meeting adjourned at 11.10am.
Respectfully submitted,
Ghada El Shimi,
Senate Secretary.
6