4 February, 2002 FPC Meeting Minutes

February 4, 2002

Room 158 Norman Hall

Members Present: Dick Allington, Phil Clark, Vivian Correa, Bridget Franks, David Honeyman, Hazel Jones, Max Parker, Tina Smith-Bonahue, Stephen Smith (Chair), Jane Townsend, Joe Wittmer

Members Absent: None

Others Present: Larry Loesch, Rod Webb, Ben Nelms

The meeting was called to order by Stephen Smith at 9:10 a.m.

Action Items

1. Approval of the agenda for February 4, 2002

Allington requested that an item be added to the agenda. He stated that Dean Nelms has been asked by the Presidential Task Force on the Future of the University of Florida to submit a review of COE departments and programs. Allington requested that the FPC review a set of criteria for evaluating departments and the college, which he stated were weighted toward outcomes that expand on the U. S. News and World Report criteria. He stated that the major concern for the college should be what provides national visibility. Allington stated that a clear set of criteria needed to be established for the COE.

Clark moved and Smith-Bonahue seconded to approve the agenda as modified to add the discussion item by Allington. The FPC unanimously approved the agenda as modified.

2. Approval of the January 14, 2002 Minutes

Clark moved and Honeyman seconded to accept the January 14^th minutes as modified. The FPC unanimously approved the minutes as modified.

3. Approval of FPC Meeting procedures

Allington moved and Smith-Bonahue seconded to accept the FPC meeting procedures as distributed by Smith. The FPC unanimously voted to approve the revised FPC meeting procedures.

4. Change in Order of Presentation

Clark moved and Jones seconded to place Allington’s discussion item after Loesch’s report from the Elections Committee. The FPC voted unanimously to change the order of the discussion items.

Discussion Items

1. Upcoming Spring Elections (Larry Loesch)

Loesch reported for the Elections Committee. Loesch highlighted some of the key points of the report, including that the College of Education (COE) Elections Committee should consist of three COE faculty members appointed by the COE Faculty Policy Council (FPC). It was recommended that his statement be modified to read “….appointed by the COE Agenda Committee.”

Under the heading of “Solicitation of Nominees,” item 2 states that the COE Elections Committee shall solicit nominees from COE faculty. The time frame for solicitation of nominees shall be no earlier than four (4) weeks and no later than two (2) weeks prior to the beginning of a scheduled election period.

Under the heading of “Elections”, one point discussed (#6) was that COE faculty members eligible to vote shall return their completed ballots in a sealed, blank envelope to the person in their department/school who was identified to collect the ballots.” “Ballot Counting” shall be performed by the COE Elections Committee “as soon as possible after conclusion of a COE election.”

A question regarding electronic voting was raised. At this time, the College does not have the resources to vote electronically. It was recommended that the Elections Committee explore the feasibility of electronic voting in the future.

A request was made to have Loesch provide the FPC [in advance] with a timeline as to the Spring 2002 elections. Smith offered to assist Loesch with this task. Draft copies of the election procedures are attached as an addendum to the minutes.

2. New item by Allington

Allington moved and Towsend secondedthat the FPC forward to the Dean, Provost, and President the proposed list of criteria for reviewing the status of departments and programs in the COE at UF.

Allington further stated that the criteria on the COE educational mission should include some of the following:

Emphasis on graduate and doctoral education;
Job placements of doctoral students at other Research I universities;
Awards received from national organizations (AERA, APA, NCATE, etc.)
Publications in national journals
Presentations at national research conferences
External funding for dissertation research
External funding for research-based professional education
Number of research publications

In Allington’s proposal, the criteria on the COE research mission would be measured by:

External funding
Number of research publications
Number of research publications in Social Science Citation Index (SSCI)
National/international awards for research
Number of editorial board memberships on the top 20 SSCI power journals
National panel memberships
Research papers presented at national research conferences
Invited research papers and presentations

Allington further proposed that the criteria on effectiveness of program design and delivery would be measured by:

Admit/enroll/graduate statistics
Time to degree completion
Attractiveness of graduates to market
Attractiveness of graduates to market
Development of junior faculty research potential
Ratio of hire to tenure
Publications and grants
Awards received by junior faculty for research

The discussion was tabled in order to receive Dean Nelms’ report.

3. Dean’s report (Ben Nelms)

Dean Nelms stated that he would like to report monthly to the FPC. He highlighted some to the issues that are being discussed at the monthly meetings of college deans, including:

UF will have one lobbyist to represent it in legislative sessions. The UF legislative priorities included: full devolution of authorities to Boards of Trustees, a tuition increase of 7.5 percent, full funding for excess enrollment, continuing the commitment to the Alec P. Courtelis Facilties Enhancement Challenge Grant program and the Major Gifts Trust Fund, and adoption of IFAS workload increase.
Colleges are preparing for the 150^th Anniversary Celebration of the university and Nelms has appointed a COE “history” task force to assist.
After the Spring Commencement of 2002, all colleges would provide the location and funding for their own commencements.
The name of the Office of Instructional Technology would be changing to the Office of Academic Technology (OAT) or Academic Technology (AT) and a proposed student fee for technology is being considered.

Dean Nelms also discussed recent and future budget reductions. The College’s support offices (formerly referred to as the Dean’s offices) received a 30 percent budget cut, departments received a 10 percent budget cut, and the budget for Summer A will receive a 30 percent cut. This year’s current cutbacks equal 4 percent and will not be permanent reductions. Next year, the budget cuts will equal 4.5 percent and will become permanent reductions. The colleges have been asked to report to the Provost on how these reductions will be met. For the COE to meet the 4.5 percent cutback, Dean Nelms stated that a 30 percent cutback of the summer programs would occur. Some faculty would not have summer teaching assignments. The COE and the Division of Continuing Education are exploring the possibility of offering two-week workshops or institutes, which would provide salaries for faculty during the summer terms. Additionally, it is expected that 10 percent of the budget cuts will also come from Operating Expenses with the remainder of the reductions coming from open lines.

Dean Nelms reported on a letter, which he received from Joseph Glover, Chair of the Presidential Task Force on the Future of the University. To assist the Task Force in understanding the national context in which our College operates, the following questions were posed:

List the top ten Colleges of Education in the nation.
What characteristics do they share which place them at the top?
Where does UF rank among the Colleges of Education?
Identify the major new trends among the top Colleges
What level of resources would be needed to enable our college to climb into this group?

Drs. Kranzler and Crocker are currently working on a report, which will provide the answers to the above questions. Dean Nelms also stated that the Task force is charged by President Young to recommend how to focus UF’s intellectual and financial capital on those endeavors which will substantially enhance the University’s achievements, advance its reputation, and make it a truly great university among the top ten or fifteen in the nation. To assist the Task Force in advising the President on achieving these goals, the Department Chairs will respond to the following questions:

Which units in our College are currently making the greatest contributions to the stated goals?
Which units in your College have the potential to make significant contributions to the stated goals, but may not yet have realized their full potential? What additional expertise, guidance, time, and resources are required to realize the full potential of these units;
Which units in your College may not have a front line responsibility to make UF a truly great university, but nevertheless are critical components to support other units or play critical roles in teaching or service.
In what areas of your college do you feel resources should be most concentrated for maximum impact?
Can you identify areas in your College that should be restructured to improve efficiency, better organize teaching and research, or reduce administrative costs?
Are there units that should be reduced, phased out over time, or eliminated so that the recouped resources can be devoted to more critical efforts?
Are there units in your College that would be more logically placed in other Colleges? Are there units in other Colleges that would mesh well with your programs and be more logically placed in your College?

Dean Nelms stated that responses to these issues are due no later than February 14th. Department Chairs are being asked to answer the first 3 questions. The Task Force will meet on February 16th to discuss each college’s responses.

Dean Nelms reported that the Provost is currently working with a second task force on a three-year plan for all colleges across the University. This plan is due during the first week of April. Dean Nelms also stated that the dean’s across the university units are very supportive of each other in evolving a three-year plan for UF.

4. Return to Allington’s Motion:

Clark suggested that the Long-Range Planning Committee review the proposed criteria presented to the FPC by Allington because it appeared to be premature to forward this criteria to the Dean, Provost, and President, and the COE faculty had not had an opportunity to review the criteria. The FPC voted on Allington’s motion to submit the proposed criteria to the Dean, Provost, and President. The vote was 8 against, 1 abstain, and 1 for the motion. The motion did not carry.

The information items and the remainder of the discussion items were tabled until the next FPC meeting because of time constraints.

Allington moved and Clark seconded to adjourn the meeting. The FPC voted unanimously to adjourn at 11:00 am.

Attachment A

College of Education

Elections Committee Procedures

———DRAFT——–

Elections Committee

The College of Education (COE) Elections Committee shall consist of three COE faculty members appointed by the COE Agenda Committee.
One member of the COE Elections Committee shall be appointed chair of the committee by the COE Agenda Committee.
COE faculty members eligible to serve on the COE Elections Committee shall hold tenure or be in tenure accruing positions in the COE.
The term of appointment of each member of the COE Elections Committee shall be one year, with the appointment to commence at the beginning of the Fall academic term of each year.
Any member of the COE Elections Committee may be reappointed to the committee. However, no member shall serve on the COE Elections Committee for more than three (3) consecutive years.

Solicitation of Nominees

The FPC shall inform the COE Elections Committee of the position(s) for which nominees shall be sought at least five (5) weeks prior to the beginning of an election period in the COE.
The COE Elections Committee shall solicit nominees from COE faculty. The time frame for solicitation of nominees shall be no earlier than four (4) weeks and no later than two (2) weeks prior to the beginning of a scheduled election period.
Nominations will end one (1) week prior to the beginning of a scheduled election period.
The COE Elections Committee shall distribute a call for nominees for the respective positions to be elected by (a) posting a notice of nominee solicitation on the COE e-mail system and (b) distribution of a written nominee solicitation to the mailbox of each faculty member in the COE.
Either self or other nominations will be accepted for each position to be elected.
Upon nomination, the COE Elections Committee will (a) determine the nominee’s eligibility for the position, (b) inform the nominee of his or her eligibility status (c) inform the nominee of the nomination, and (d) determine if the nominee is willing to be a candidate for the position.

Elections

An election period for the COE shall be a minimum of seven (7) work/business days (i.e., excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal or university holidays).
A written ballot for a COE election shall be prepared by the COE Elections Committee.
An FPC representative from each department/school shall be appointed by the FPC to assist with the ballot dissemination and retrieval process.
The COE Elections Committee shall distribute a written ballot and blank envelope to each faculty member in the COE eligible to vote in the election via the department’s appointed FPC representative.
Each FPC representative thus selected shall identify a person in the department/school to whom the ballots shall be returned.
COE faculty members eligible to vote shall return their completed ballots in a sealed, blank envelope to the person in their department/school who was identified to collect the ballots.
Each person designated to collect ballots in each department/school shall maintain a list of persons submitting a ballot in order to avoid duplicate submissions of ballots.
The COE Elections Committee shall retrieve the ballots from each COE department/school as soon as possible after the end of the election period.
The person in each department/school responsible for collection of the ballots shall destroy the list of voting faculty members after the ballots have been collected from the department/school.

Ballot Counting

The votes on ballots from a COE election shall be counted by the COE Elections Committee as soon as possible after conclusion of a COE election.
At least two (2) members of the COE Elections Committee shall count the votes and record the results.
In the event that two or more of the COE Elections Committee members were candidates on the ballot, the FPC shall appoint one or two members (as needed) from among the COE tenured faculty to count the votes and record the results.
A COE faculty member shall be elected to a position by a simple majority of the vote count for the position.
In the event of a tie vote for a position, the COE Elections Committee shall conduct a runoff election to commence within one week after conclusion of the vote count. Announcement of a runoff election shall be made by the COE Elections Committee through use of the COE e-mail system and distribution of a written announcement to all COE faculty members. The ballot for a runoff election shall contain only the names of those candidates for which there was a tie vote. The time frame and procedures for voting in a runoff election shall be the same as those for a regular election.

Post Election Procedures

Announcement of the results of a COE election shall be withheld until the election is fully complete (e.g., after a runoff election), but shall be made as soon as possible thereafter.
The COE Elections Committee shall report the results of an election to the COE by use of the COE e-mail system.
The COE Elections Committee shall report the numbers of ballots cast from each department/school to the chair of the FPC at the conclusion of the election process.
The COE Elections Committee chairperson shall retain the ballots from each election for a period of four (4) months after the conclusion of an election period, and destroy the ballots thereafter.

February 4, 2002/by robinglecain