2 December, 2002 FPC Meeting Minutes
December 2, 2002
Room 158 Norman Hall
Members Present: Phil Clark, Maureen Conroy, Vivian Correa, Silvia Echevarria-Doan, Lamont Flowers, Bridget Franks, Paul Sindelar, Jane Townsend, Nancy Waldron, Elizabeth Yeager
Members Absent: Jim Archer
Other Present: Dean Catherine Emihovich, Associate Dean John Kranzler
Vivian Correa called the meeting to order at 2:07 p.m.
Agenda and Minutes
1. Approval of the agenda for December 2, 2002.
Yeager made a motion to approve the agenda as submitted by Correa. Clark seconded the motion. The FPC unanimously approved the agenda.
2. Approval of the November 18, 2002 Minutes
Sindelar made a motion to approve the minutes of November 18th, which was seconded by Conroy. The minutes of November 18, 2002 were unanimously approved.
Reports of FPC Committees
· College Curriculum Committee
Waldron reported that the CCC met electronically by e-mail for the November 25th meeting. Kranzler stated that the University Curriculum Committee approved all courses that were submitted by the COE. The next CCC meeting is January 6, 2003.
· Undergraduate Admissions/Petitions Committee
Franks reported that this committee has not met since the last FPC meeting.
· Graduate Admissions/Petitions Committee
Echeverria-Doan reported that the GA&P committee would meet on December 6, 2002.
· Faculty Affairs Committee
No report.
· Research Advisory Committee
Conroy stated that the committee would meet on December 10, 2002. A survey has been distributed to faculty asking for comments regarding the COE doctoral research requirements.
· Student Recruitment and Admission Committee
Yeager reported that the committee would meet on December 11, 2002.
· Long-Range Planning Committee
No report.
· Ad hoc Committee on Assistant/Associate Dean Review
Correa reported that the Ad hoc committee is completing work on a document that presents a review procedure for Assistant/Associate Deans. These procedures will be discussed at the next FPC meeting on December 16th.
The committee also discussed changing the language in the constitution regarding the time period for administrative reviews. Presently the Dean is to be reviewed every year and the assistant/associate Deans every two years. A recommendation will be made that reviews be conducted every three years.
Report from the Dean
Dean Emihovich reported she met with Provost Colburn, Dr. Glover,
Dr. Dickinson, and Dr. Frazier regarding the College of Education Strategic Plan. The consensus of the plan was that the College was moving in a positive direction. Discussion focused on the need for collaboration between the COE and the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, specifically involving math and science programs. Current collaboration with the Colleges of Engineering and Agriculture was recognized and encouraged to continue, as well as collaboration surrounding early childhood that involves David Lawrence.
Discussions with Colburn focused on structural issues that may serve as a barrier to the development of collaborative programs. Two issues identified were: (1) Tenure and Promotion issues, and (2) FTE breakout and resources for joint programs.
Emihovich indicated that the process used to develop the strategic planning document worked well, with input provided by members of the Dean’s Advisory Council and FPC members. It was reinforced that while the plan is now in written form, it is viewed as a working document that is available as a stimulus for further feedback and revision.
Dean Emihovich reported as faculty retire or leave the university, one to one replacements would not occur. Request for faculty replacements will have to be framed in a manor that is consistent with the university and COE strategic plan, and increasingly reflects collaborative efforts across programs. In the future, faculty will likely be working in multiple programs, not just one program in a single department.
Discussion focused on the multiple pressures placed on the college at both the state and national levels. Emihovich stated there were discussions occurring within the state of the need to release universities from the myriad of state regulations. Incompatible requests are being made to meet all state regulations related to teacher education, and at the same time develop alternative and innovative programs. Presently the state is giving flexibility to school districts to develop alternative certification programs, while at the same time “tying the hands” of colleges of education with additional requirements. This message is being communication consistently to the Florida DOE.
The provost is aware that we will not be producing a huge number of new teachers for the state and is supportive of a greater college emphasis on graduate education options. It was noted that in a time of declining resources this would mean that an increase in graduate enrollment can only occur with some reduction in undergraduate programs.
Graduate Admissions – Continuing Professional Development for Teachers
Kranzler reported on feedback from Colburn and Gerhardt regarding the proposal on continuing professional development for teachers. Colburn supports the proposal that an undergraduate GPA of 3.0 OR a 1000 GRE score apply to certified teachers, as well as current students enrolled in the Proteach early childhood and elementary programs. Gerhardt continues to support the need for a GRE floor set at 900 for all applicants, including teachers and students enrolled in Proteach. The proposal is currently in Gerhardt’s hands and Kranzler anticipates hearing from them shortly.
Unfinished Business
· T&P guidelines 3-year review (Faculty Affairs Committee)
An update was provided on the progress of the T & P guidelines. The FAC met today to discuss the feedback provided by departments and individual faculty members. The FAC plans to work on some specific language changes in the proposal and then will submit the document to the FPC for approval.
Townsend stated that the 3-year review appears to be the issue generating the most comment. Comments range from keeping the 3-year review as specified in the proposal, making it a more formalized process, or making it a voluntary process. Although faculty at the college level are in agreement with the proposal in general, some departments expressed concerns with how college administration would implement the approved COE T&P guidelines.
Dean Emihovich inquired as to what dynamics have occurred in the COE to cause a fear of lack of support from the administration. Discussion focused on changes and ambiguity about T & P criteria, narrow perspectives about scholarship, and concerns that faculty load are not considered in T & P decisions. Comments supported the need to revisit College documents about the criteria for tenure and promotion. Correa stated that the latest criteria for the college were developed more than 5 years ago, and the purpose of that revision was to consider the area of “ service” for tenure and promotion.
A discussion followed regarding the process for approving the T & P proposal when it comes before the FPC. Various opinions were expressed about whether the proposal should be submitted for a vote to all COE faculty or have the FPC vote on the proposal. According to the COE Constitution, the FPC is to decide which issues are forwarded for a full faculty vote. This issue will be revisited when the proposal comes before the FPC at an upcoming meeting.
FPC members asked that the department and faculty feedback provided to the FAC on the T & P proposal be made available to FPC members for review when the final proposal comes for approval.
Reminder
Correa stated if FPC members are unable to attend scheduled meetings, it is important that they send an alternate. FPC members are encouraged to make these arrangements in advance, so that all members and departments are represented at each meeting
Adjournment
[1] Clark moved the meeting be adjourned. Sindelar seconded the motion. The Committee voted unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 3:35 pm.
