Meeting Minutes

,

17 September, 2002 Dean’s Advisory Council Meeting Minutes

Members present:  Dr. Vivian Correa, Dr. Harry Daniels, Dr. Kathy Gratto (for Dr. James Doud), Ms. Mary Driscoll, Ms. Kay Hughes, Dr. John Kranzler, Dr. James McLeskey, Dr. David Miller, Dr. Mickie Miller, Dr. Dorene Ross, Dr. Theresa Vernetson, Dr. Nancy Waldron, Dr. Rodman Webb, Dr. Sandra Witt

Information Items

Committee members reviewed the revised August 20, 2002 meeting minutes and the September 3, 2002 meeting minutes. Dr. Ross made a motion to accept the minutes, and the committee members agreed unanimously on their acceptance.

Dean Emihovich circulated a packet of information that she received from the University of Illinois at Chicago for review by committee members. The packet contains descriptions of academic programs, centers, and information about urban school partnerships. She suggested that the college consider creating a similar packet to showcase college programs. She also circulated an announcement about a conference for the European Council of International Schools that will take place in Berlin on November 21-24.

She requested nominations from department chairpersons for faculty representatives for the following two committees:

  1. College Technology Committee (at least one representative from each department); and
  2. Developmental Advisory Board (faculty members who have an interest in fund raising).

Dr. Correa reminded committee members that the Dean’s Advisory Committee meeting minutes would be posted on the Faculty Policy Council Web site.

Dean Emihovich met with College of Education alumni on September 14. The alumni expressed interest in the University of Florida Strategic Plan and its possible implications for the college. They expressed strong support for the faculty, students, teacher preparation programs, and the College of Education.

Ms. Hughes provided an update about the ongoing faculty lunches with Dean Emihovich.

Ms. Driscoll announced that faculty representation would be appreciated at a reception that will take place at the Sarasota Yacht Club on October 2 from 4-6 p.m.

Discussion Items

Dr. Donald Pemberton, Director of the Lastinger Center for Learning, has requested faculty input about his proposed strategies for accomplishing the center’s objectives, as outlined in the Lastinger Center Concept Paper (August 19, 2002 revision) and the Lastinger Center Portfolio of Programs. These documents were provided to the committee members prior to the meeting for review.

Dr. Pemberton reiterated his commitment to align the work of the Lastinger Center with the mission of the college, the mission of the University of Florida, and the research interests of faculty members as the center continues its partnerships with the Florida Department of Education, school systems throughout the state, and the business, educational and civic leadership of the state to improve the quality of teaching and learning in Florida’s schools. He indicated that center resources must be focused to ensure their maximum effect. His first step in engaging faculty is to respond to their research interests. He hopes to identify a core group of University of Florida faculty and persons from around the state who will lead initiatives.

He has met with faculty members from the School of Teaching and Learning and will meet with faculty from the other departments in the next few weeks. He plans to meet frequently with faculty to provide information about initiatives and collaborative opportunities.

He elicited input from committee members to assist him with focusing and prioritizing the Lastinger Center initiatives. Dr. McLeskey praised the “Invest in Schools” initiative, whereby resources are mobilized to create a network of high poverty, high performance schools that will be supported by teams of civic, corporate, university, and public leaders.

The Lastinger Center’s vision and mission statements were discussed. Associate Dean Webb discussed the importance of replicating national scholarly work in Florida. Dr. Vernetson suggested that Dr. Pemberton might wish to discuss readiness initiatives when he consults with DOE representatives in Tallahassee. Dr. Correa discussed expanding the definition of marginalized children, with increased emphasis on linguistic diversity. She and Dr. Daniels emphasized the importance of including families in the decision making process. He discussed the importance of actively reaching out to those who are at the periphery of the educational process. Dr. McLeskey discussed the need for a coherent focus on improving schools for students who are not achieving adequately.

Dean Emihovich inquired about how best to advance from the objectives listed in the Concept Paper to effect meaningful school improvement. The need for the development of a sustainable model with which the center can move forward was discussed. She asked about the possibility of expanding the college’s current partner school programs (Prairie View and Duval Elementary Schools) to other schools in the area, perhaps Williams Elementary School, identifying a model school, and beginning focused initiatives in the feeder schools to the Alliance Schools. Three issues that must be addressed in order to move forward with this process are tenure and promotion criteria, merit, and program resources.

The relationship of the Lastinger Center Concept Paper to the issues of research and the scholarship of engagement was discussed. The role of research in relationship to engaging the involvement of faculty and graduate students in the various center activities was discussed. Dr. David Miller stated that an increased emphasis on research would possibly increase faculty involvement with Lastinger Center initiatives. Various research models were discussed, including the school-based research of Carl Glickman, formerly of the University of Georgia and now at the SW Texas State University. Glickman’s advocacy for the creation of structures that promote democratic processes in schools has led to an increased appreciation of action research by the schools. Other school improvement models and processes were discussed, including the Coalition for Essential Schools. It was agreed that it would be beneficial for leaders in the school improvement field to be invited to present information about their initiatives to the faculty. While Dean Emihovich does not necessarily view the Lastinger Center as a “research and development” center, it can provide an important link for faculty research agendas.

What advantages are there for faculty members to work through the Lastinger Center? Associate Dean Webb noted that the following issues must be addressed to encourage active faculty involvement:

  1. The Center must be seen as an invitational activity;
  2. Such activity must be done with a vision for improving schools;
  3. There must be sensitivity for faculty members’ need for relevant research; and
  4. There must be a realization that the Lastinger Center has multiple audiences.

Dean Emihovich discussed the complexities involved in educational research, including the multiple audiences that it must also serve. Part of the work that the Lastinger Center will accomplish will be to disseminate information about the College’s productive faculty, which will in turn make their research accomplishments more visible to multiple audiences.

Dr. Pemberton will continue his conversations with the faculty (and other audiences served by the Lastinger Center) in order to bring its important initiatives to the next level.

Future Agenda Items

Dean Emihovich announced that the main agenda item for the next meeting would be the NCATE accreditation review process, led by Associate Dean Rod Webb.

The meeting was adjourned at 11:25 a.m.

/by
,

9 September, 2002 FPC Meeting Minutes

September 9, 2002

Room 158 Norman Hall

Members Present: Jim Archer, Phil Clark, Vivian Correa, Maureen Conroy, Silvia Echevarria-Doan, Lamont Flowers, Bridget Franks, Jane Townsend, Nancy Waldron, Elizabeth Yeager

Members Absent:  Paul Sindelar

Other Present: Associate Dean Rod Webb, Dean’s Representative

 

The meeting was called to order by Vivian Correa at 2:35 p.m.  Correa announced the newly designed web site for FPC, education.ufl.edu/committees/fpc. The web site includes the following: Constitution, Membership for Operating and Standing Committees, FPC Minutes, Calendar, and Archives.

Action Items

1. Approval of the agenda for September 9, 2002.

Yeager made a motion to approve the agenda as submitted by Correa. Franks seconded the motion. The FPC unanimously approved the agenda.

2. Approval of the Minutes of August 26, 2002.

Townsend made a motion to approve the minutes of August 26, 2002, which was seconded by Yeager. The minutes were unanimously approved.

Report from the Dean

Associate Dean Webb was attending FPC for Dean Emihovich. Webb reported that Emohovich was meeting with the department chairs to discuss allocation of faculty lines and future plans for the College over the next four to five years. Webb reviewed new university procedures for allocating faculty lines, stating that faculty lines no longer stayed within departments or colleges. Instead, as faculty lines become open they revert back to the Provost’s office and are reallocated based on the university’s strategic plan.

Correa commented that the issue of increasing faculty diversity as new positions become available was also under discussion.

Information Items

1. Update on FPC Members and Committees

·  College Curriculum Committee. Waldron stated that one more departmental member was needed to complete this committee. As soon as that member was designated, meetings for the CCC would be scheduled.

·  Undergraduate Admissions Petitions Committee. Franks reported that this committee has not met.

·  Graduate Admissions/Petitions Committee. Echevarria-Doan announced that this committee would be meeting on Monday, September 16, for an organizational session.

·  Faculty Affairs Standing Committee. Townsend reported that one member was on sabbatical this semester and this committee had not met yet. Correa stated that guidelines needed to be discussed in situations where a member, who will be absent over a period of time, would need a substitute. The FPC approved a substitute from the same department in this particular case.

·  Student Recruitment and Admissions Committee. Yeager stated that this committee will meet on September 26.

·  Research Advisory Committee. Conroy announced that this committee would have its first meeting on September 18 from 2-3 pm.

·  Long-Range Planning Committee. Archer stated that this committee has not met.

2. Discussion of Lastinger Center Concept Paper with Don Pemberton (September 23, 2002).

Correa reminded FPC members to review the Lastinger Center Concept Paper prior to the September 23rd meeting. Correa stated that Pemberton has asked the Dean’s Advisory Council to also review this paper.

Webb stated that the concept paper was written for multiple audiences, not just faculty. FPC members should keep this in mind as they review the paper.

Correa stated that Pemberton is looking for college-wide input regarding the paper. Feedback will be used to revise the paper and inform discussion at a meeting of the Lastinger Center Advisory Council that is scheduled for October 4. It is expected that the concept paper will go through a second review process.

Action Items:

1. Nominations for the 2002-2003 Elections Committee

Correa stated that the Elections Committee is in charge of the spring elections. Last year this committee consisted of Loesch, Campbell, and Gregory. The Agenda Committee selects the three members of the Elections Committee. Correa asked for nominations from FPC members. A suggestion was made to retain the current members for continuity. Correa stated that she would approach the existing committee members to request that they serve another term. If one or more choose not to serve, the Agenda Committee will select a faculty member to serve on the Elections Committee. Clark suggested that department faculty members rotate on a three-year cycle to serve on this committee.

Webb suggested that all other College elections should be held at the same time. Correa noted that the spring election slate could include all committee elections in the college.

2. Nominations for the 2002-2003 Parliamentarian

Correa reported that the current Parliamentarian is Candace Harper. Correa said she would approach Harper and request that she serve a second term. The specific responsibilities for the Parliamentarian are not identified in the Constitution. In the past, the Parliamentarian has advised the chair on Robert’s Rules during COE faculty meetings, and also counted votes taken at college-wide faculty meetings. The issue of responsibilities should be reconsidered and clarified as changes are proposed to the Constitution this year.

Webb distributed copies of Robert’s Rules to FPC members to share with chairs of the FPC Operating and Standing Committees.

3. Graduate Admissions Proposal (Student Recruitment and Admissions Committee)

Correa reviewed the Graduate Admissions Proposal that was considered by the FPC last year. The proposed policy would place responsibility for graduate admissions decisions at the department level, within the guidelines of the Graduate School. Related points that were also discussed by FPC included:

· The need to develop additional administrative procedures related to admissions,

· 10% of all admissions in the College may have double or single exemptions, and

· Departments can make “Masters Only Admission.” In other cases departments can admit students conditionally (e.g., no grades of “Incomplete,” maintaining a GPA of 3.0 or above over the first two semesters of coursework).

Departments were asked to provide a written response to the proposal after discussion within department faculty meetings. Responses to this request included:

 

Department of Special Education voted unanimously to support the FPC proposal to give the final responsibility for graduate admission to the departments and that oversight of admission by a COE committee is discontinued. However, the COE committee would remain in place for students to petition when denied admission at the department level. Additional discussion addressed possible alternative tests that might be used as an admission criterion and the need to monitor the 10% admission rule for double and single exceptions. The faculty will also review its policies for petitions and admissions.

The consensus of the Department of Educational Psychology was that:

· Removing the College level committee does not remove the need for a review after it leaves the department,

· Removing this function of the College level committee also makes the decisions by individual departments less public,

· If the committee is not functioning well now, that does not mean that it should not serve this function. Instead, we should deal with the more important issue of the function, process, and selection of faculty to participate on the committee, and

·   A Master’s degree in another area should not be used for admissions into doctoral study.

The School of Teaching and Learning supports the recommendation that responsibility for graduate admission be placed at the departmental level within the guidelines of the Graduate School. The T&L also supports the Graduate School policy that “Applicants with a previous graduate or professional degree or equivalent from a regionally accredited US institution may be exempt from the GRE and undergraduate GPA requirements.” The ST&L recommends that the appropriate committee draft some guidelines about what kinds of things might need to be monitored by the Associate Dean for Graduate Studies and that the Associate Dean develop procedures for such monitoring.

The Department of Counselor Education favors the adoption of the proposed changes. The only point of concern is that students in the Department of Counselor Education are admitted to an M.Ed./Ed.S. program; therefore, the language regarding “Master’s only” needs to make provisions for CED’s students.

No response was received from the Department of Educational Leadership, Policy, and Foundations.

Correa stated that a motion to divide this proposal into three sections was approved at the April 29th FPC meeting. FPC members spoke in favor of sending this new proposal back to the Student Recruitment and Admissions Committee for review. The proposal designates three admission policies to consider, (1) Proteach master’s, (2) other master’s, and (3) doctoral programs. The Student Recruitment & Admissions Committee was directed to discuss where specialist programs should be considered, either with (2) other master’s or (3) doctoral programs.

Webb reminded FPC members that changes in this policy would have implications for relationships with the Graduate School, the Provost’s office, and may also effect U. S. News &World report rankings. Part of the rankings are based on GRE scores for entering students.

Correa stated that no recommendation had been made to dissolve the Admission and Petitions committee, only that this committee would serve a different function — that of a due process for students to appeal an admission decision if the department has denied them.

Last year there was also discussion with the Graduate School about alternative assessment measures used for admissions. The Graduate School asked that the College keep data for one year on the correlation between the GRE and alternative measures and present this for further discussion.

Correa stated that, under the Constitution, the FPC may refer any policy decision to the faculty for a college-wide vote, or the FPC could make a decision within itself.

4. Associate/Assistant Dean Review

Correa reported that a two-year review for Associate and Assistant Deans is called for in the COE Constitution. The FPC needs to decide how these reviews will be carried out and the criteria that should be used. Clark suggested that it would be important to poll the COE faculty as part of the review process. Correa recommended that the FPC work with the Dean on criteria for these evaluations. Clark stated that a review of the positions descriptions would be helpful.

Correa suggested that an ad hoc committee be assembled to conduct these evaluations. Clark suggested that these evaluations should not be held each year, and that a method for evaluating the Associate and Assistant Deans needs to be developed. Correa stated that past surveys need to be reviewed by the FPC. Clark suggested that two reviews be held — one by the faculty and the other by the Dean. Criteria needs to be developed for these reviews in collaboration with the Dean for continuity, not separately. Criteria for these reviews need to be acquired from the Dean in order for the faculty to evaluate what the Associate and Assistant Deans job functions are.

A temporary ad hoc committee was convened: Clark, Webb (non-voting member), Townsend, Emihovich, and Correa.

5. Tenure and Promotion Procedures (Faculty Affairs Committee)

At the end of last year the Faculty Affairs Committee put forward a proposal to the FPC about tenure and promotion procedures in the college.

Waldron stated that the intent of this review was to provide consistent procedures for T&P across the College. The FAC spent last year collecting and reviewing information from each department and soliciting faculty input. One part of the proposal is the requirement for a three year review of untenured faculty. Townsend stated that the proposed three-year review would be part of a mentoring process for junior faculty. This review is not an adversarial review, but a supportive review.

Archer stated that the criteria for T&P has changed over the years and needs to be clarified for junior faculty. The College criteria should parallel the University criteria.

Waldron stated that the intent of this proposal was to consider the procedures for the T&P process in the College, as opposed to criteria. The task given to FAC clearly specified the need for consistency of procedures and equity across departments in the College.

Concerns were expressed about how faculty, particularly junior faculty, would react to the idea of a three year review. Correa stated that the proposal should be posted on the web and some of the wording should reflect that the review is to assist junior faculty and provide feedback to them. Townsend stated that the terms, “three-year progress report” might be used in lieu of a “three-year review.”

Waldron stated that the cover sheet to the proposal was not included today and this may provide better information about how the proposal was developed. This information will be forwarded to FPC members.

The FPC accepted the report from the Faculty Affairs Committee and Correa stated that it would be discussed as “old business” at the next meeting. The wording of this proposal will be reviewed. The proposal should be considered a “draft”, forwarded to the faculty for feedback, and discussed at a future FPC meeting.

Clark moved that the meeting be adjourned. Townsend seconded the motion. The committee voted unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 4:00 pm.

/by
,

3 September, 2002 Dean’s Advisory Council Meeting Minutes

Members present:  Dr. Michael Bowie, Dr. Vivian Correa, Dr. James Doud,

Dr. Harry Daniels, Ms. Kay Hughes, Dr. John Kranzler,

Dr. James McLeskey, Dr. David Miller, Dr. Dorene Ross,

Dr. Frances Vandiver, Dr. Theresa Vernetson, Dr. Nancy Waldron,

Dr. Rodman Webb

Administrative Items

Committee members reviewed the August 20, 2002, meeting minutes.  Dr. Bowie made a motion to accept the minutes.  Committee members agreed unanimously to accept the minutes.

Dean Emihovich reported on the following agenda items that were discussed at the Provost Staff Breakfast meeting on August 30.  She stated that salary increases will become effective October 1.  Promotion raises and salary compression rates will both be delayed. The University is currently experiencing a VISA problem with international students’ admissions.  Departments are encouraged to recruit and begin the admission process earlier.  An International Student seminar will be held on November 20 (during International Student Week).  Dr. McLeskey raised a question regarding international students being allowed to pay in-state tuition for admission at the University of Florida.  Dean Emihovich stated that she would follow-up with the Provost on this issue.  The University will be celebrating its 150th Anniversary in 2003.  Ms. Kay Hughes announced that commemorative events are being planned.

Discussion Items

Dean Emihovich stated that she and the Deans have discussed the possibility of doctoral students providing staffing for College Committees.  No decision has been made on this issue and it will be discussed at a later date.

Committee members discussed the recent parking problems which include 1) the gate often getting stuck in the vertical position, 2) raising gate at an earlier time, 3) no parking available for visitors and students who commute to campus to attend evening classes, and 4) USA Credit Union employees who also park in the Norman garage.  Committee members suggested lifting the gate at 4:00 rather than at 4:30.  Staff will need to meet visitors at the gate and use their Gator One card to gain access for the visitor.  Dean Emihovich will also contact Mr. Bob Miller, Vice President for Administrative Services, regarding these issues.

Dean Emihovich asked Chairs to report on faculty positions they will need for 2003-2004:

  • Dr. Daniels stated that Counselor Education will lose three faculty positions next year.  The department will need three school counseling track associate/professor positions and one mental health counseling assistant professor position.
  • Dr. Doud stated that the Department of Educational Leadership will lose three positions.  The Department chair will also need to be replaced.  One faculty member will retire mid-year in 2004.
  • Dr. Miller stated that the Department of Educational Psychology will lose one faculty position.  He also expressed concern of losing faculty to the Dean’s office.
  • Dr. McLeskey stated that the Department of Special Education will not lose any faculty positions next year.
  • Dr. Ross stated that the School of Teaching and Learning will lose two math positions over the next two years.  Reading courses for all Proteach programs will be needed.  Assistant or associate professors for these positions and/or joint programs with the Department of Special Education were discussed.  She stated that 22 sections of ESOL must be taught and the department will need one associate professor to fill these sections.  The Department Chair will also need to be replaced.
  • Dr. Vandiver stated that P.K. Yonge will lose 19 faculty positions next year.  The school will also need an assistant principal and an ESE specialist.

Dean Emihovich stated that the President has submitted his Strategic Plan to the Board of Trustees.  She informed Chairs to start deliberations among their faculty as to what they would like this college to look in the next five years. She also reminded them that it may not be possible to keep all retiree positions.  She encouraged departments to leverage positions with departments across campus and in collaboration with those programs focused on children and families.  Dean Emihovich asked Committee members to consider critical issues for discussion next year.  The following were cited:

  • Dr. McLeskey emphasized the need for a senior level position in the Department of Counselor Education.  He also questioned if a national search is required for a Department Chair position.  Dean Emihovich responded by stating that national searches become necessary if there are no faculty within the department who are prepared to assume this role.  She also noted a need for leadership development to build this capacity within departments, and that she would be exploring some possibilities for doing this in the future.
  • Dean Emihovich stated that growth enrollment would be a critical issue for the Graduate Studies and Research office.
  • Dr. Ross stated her concerns regarding the impact on programs when there is insufficient faculty to staff required courses.

Committee members discussed the following options for filling faculty positions:  hiring visiting faculty for diverse appointments; teachers-in-residence (must have master’s degree); counselor-in-residence (must have doctoral degree); principal-in-residence, and establishing joint appointments with doctoral students.

Dean Emihovich asked Chairs to provide information to the Dean’s office indicating how faculty members are linking their activities to the University agenda of children and families.

Committee members discussed various ways of increasing diversity in hiring new faculty, including a focus on disabilities and sexual orientation.

Future Agenda Items

Dean Emihovich encouraged committee members to read the Lastinger Center Concept Paper prior to the September 17 meeting for discussion.  A Winter Retreat will be held in the near future and agenda items will include diversity issues and a five to ten year College strategic plan.

Dr. McLeskey distributed a handout from the Florida Department of Education regarding a Faculty Innovation Institute that will be held on November 14-16 at the Westin Innisbrook Resort in Tampa, Florida.  The institute will provide unique opportunities for faculty teams to examine and clarify pressing issues facing colleges of education in a time of rapid change.

Dr. Vernetson announced that an inaugural institute on service learning will be held on September 25-27 in Tampa, Florida.  The institute is sponsored by the University of South Florida, the Florida Campus Compact, and the Florida Department of Education.  She informed Chairs that faculty participation is needed and names of interested faculty should be submitted to the Office of Student Services.

Meeting was adjourned at 12:00.

/by
,

26 August, 2002 FPC Meeting Minutes

August 26, 2002

Room 158 Norman Hall

Members Present: Jim Archer, Elizabeth Bondy, Phil Clark, Vivian Correa, Dale Campbell, Maureen Conroy, Silvia Echevarria-Doan, Lamont Flowers, Bridget Franks, Mirka Koro-Ljungberg, Paul Sindelar, Jane Townsend, Nancy Waldron, Elizabeth Yeager

Other Present: Dean Emihovich, John Kranzler

The meeting was called to order by Vivian Correa at 2:05 p.m.

Correa requested that FPC members introduce themselves by sharing their interests and position duties.

Action Items

1.  Approval of the agenda for August 26, 2002.

Sindelar made a motion to approve the agenda as submitted by  Correa.  Clark seconded the motion.  The FPC unanimously approved the agenda as it was submitted.

2. Approval of FPC Minutes

Approval of FPC Minutes for April 29

Archer made a motion to approve the minutes of 4/29, which was seconded by Franks.  The minutes of April 29, 2002 were unanimously approved with the following revisions:

a. Jane Townsend was removed from the “Members Absent” list and placed under “Members Present.”

b. Pg. 2, “Webb stated…” was revised to say, “Webb stated that case studies can be considered Ph.D. work with the appropriate philosophical and theoretical framework.”

Approval of FPC Minutes for May 2

Doan made a motion to approve the minutes of 5/2, which was seconded by Sindelar.  The minutes of May 2, 2002 were unanimously approved with the following revisions:

a. Doan replaces Parker as a member of the FPC for Counselor Education.

b. Sherrard will be the alternate to the FPC for Counselor Education.

Correa remarked that the Agenda Committee (Correa, Waldron, Clark, a Dean’s Representative) formulates the agenda for the FPC meetings. A report from the Dean will be a regular item on the FPC Agenda.

Report from the Dean

Dean Emihovich stated that as part of her report to the FPC she will share information from meetings with the Provost and university administration.

Items of interest to the College:

a.  Two new Ad Hoc committees are being formed that will advise the Dean. The two committees are (1) a Development Advisory Board, which will review and develop fund raising strategies for the College.  This committee will include faculty representatives, as well as alumni and community members. (2) a Technology Advisory Committee which will review the technology needs (computers, operating systems, future purchases, software use) of the College. One goal is to align future technology purchases of the College with the rest of the University.  This committee will include COE faculty and staff, as well as cross-campus representatives.

b. Two graduate assistants will be added to the Dean’s staff by the end of September. These GA’s will work with the Dean’s office on college-wide projects, as well as provide support to college committees. Discussion focused on providing GA’s an opportunity to see faculty roles that involve committee work and administrative policy-making, which may better prepare them for future academic positions.

c.  More support will be provided for research in the College.  A new office entitled, “Center for Collaborative Assessment, Research and Evaluation (CARE)” will be established.  This will occur as the research and graduate education responsibilities of the Graduate Studies and Research Office are separated.  It is proposed that this office will be managed by a director or program manager who will review RFPs, proposals, and assist faculty and graduate students when contracting with agencies across campus and throughout the State of Florida.

Kranzler announced that Judi Scarborough will be leaving the College to accept a position with IFAS.  The duties of this position will be divided between the Fiscal Office and the Graduate Studies and Research Office.  Until offices are reorganized and vacant positions filled, Kranzler will oversee grant submissions. Correa recommended that Kranzler communicate directly to faculty how grants will be processed until CARE is established.

Kranzler announced that a research survey was recently completed by the Office of Graduate Studies and Research. Once results are compiled this information will be shared with the FPC at a future meeting.

Information Items

1. Review of FPC Structures and Operating Guidelines

Correa reviewed the structure for the FPC.  The Chair (a non-voting member) resides over FPC meetings.  There are 10 FPC members (two tenure-accruing faculty members from each department) and 5 alternates (one from each department).  The secretary is a voting member of the FPC.  The secretary becomes the Chair after one year.  A Dean’s representative (non-voting member) also attends the FPC meetings.  The FPC has Operating Committees (Agenda Committee, Steering Committee, Undergraduate Admissions/Petitions Committee, and Graduate Admissions/Petitions Committee) and Standing Committees (Faculty Affairs Committee, Research Advisory Committee, Student Recruitment and Admissions Committee, Long-Range Planning Committee).  The  Elections Committee and the Parliamentarian are determined by the FPC.

The Operating Guidelines for the FPC include:

· All standing and operating committees shall meet at least twice during the academic year with all meetings being announced to all faculty;

· On all committees, the Dean or Dean’s representative shall be a non-voting member;

· All committees shall submit an executive summary of their proceedings to the FPC.  The executive summary must be submitted in the Spring semester before the last regular meeting of the FPC;

·  At the completion of each Spring semester, each committee will provide the FPC with a three-ring-binder of the committees’ procedures, agendas, and minutes; and,

· For standing committees, the FPC representative will call the first Fall meeting.

Operating Guidelines for the FPC include:

· All committee reports should not exceed two minutes in length.  After each committee report, time will be allocated for clarification of the report.  No new items or discussion should occur during committee reports.  As a result of a committee report, an action item may be placed on the agenda.

· To request that an action item be placed on the FPC agenda, and/or to be placed on the agenda to speak to an issue, non-FPC members should provide a written request to the FPC chair.

2. Review of the 2001-2002 Executive Summaries of FPC Committees

The following issues were identified for continued work this year:

Research Advisory Committee (RAC) – Tracy Linderholm (Chair)

·   Reworded Ed.D. narrative in the Graduate Catalog

· Advising Office of Graduate Studies and Research on setting guidelines for grant submissions

· Advising Graduate Studies Office on dissertation review process

Student Recruitment and Admissions Committee – Ruth Lowery (Chair)

· Alternatives to current college policy for graduate admissions

· Issues related to GRE for graduate admission in the College

· Issues related to doctoral student recruitment

Faculty Affairs Committee – Nancy Waldron (Chair)

· Submitted proposal for procedures related to Tenure & Promotion

· Communication in the COE about criteria for Tenure & Promotion, including promotion from Associate to Full Professor

Long-Range Planning Committee – Jeanne Repetto (Chair)

· Strategies for increasing research infrastructure

· Share the Executive Report (which outlines nine areas for consideration) with faculty.  These areas have not been shared with faculty as of this date.

Correa prompted FPC members to look at the new FPC website which now displays new links under Archives, and also links which connect to the college committees.

Correa also reported that an ad hoc committee would be formed to review Assistant and Associate Deans, which is required by the constitution every two years.  Webb will be the first Dean to be reviewed by the faculty under this provision.

Correa also reported that during this year revisions will be made to the by laws of the Constitution.  Faculty will be able to review role functions, committee functions and clean-up language. There will be a public announcement of changes.  In March, the faculty will vote on the constitutional changes in person, rather than by ballot, at the Spring Faculty Meeting.

3. Assignment of FPC Members to Committees

Operating Committees

Graduate Admissions/Petitions Committee – Paul Sindelar will serve as the FPC member.

Standing Committees

Student Recruitment and Admissions Committee – Elizabeth Yeager will serve as the FPC member.

Long-Range Planning Committee – James Archer will serve as the FPC member.

Election Committee – New committee needs to be formed.  This will be an action item at the next meeting.

Parliamentarian – This position also will be discussed within the FPC meeting.

4. Invitation by the Dean’s Advisory Council to Add the FPC Secretary as a New Member

Nancy Waldron, FPC secretary, has been added to the Dean’s Advisory Council.

5. Consideration of Support Staff for FPC and College Curriculum Committee

It is proposed that two graduate assistants, assigned to the Dean’s office, will assist with minutes for the FPC and College Curriculum Committee.

6. Request from Kay Hughes for Assistance with Faculty Media Matrix

Kay Hughes would like to develop a list of faculty that are interested in speaking to the media on designated topics in Education. It was suggested that information regarding faculty might be extracted from faculty resumes, but often this is not helpful in identifying individuals who are willing to speak on current “hot topics” that do not neatly correspond to research areas. Bondy suggested that Hughes and Vernetson start a list of types of questions asked by reporters and other public inquiries, then FPC members could build on this list.  Clark suggested that the FPC contact Steve Orlando, who is in the UF media office, for some input.  Correa stated that this item could be added to the agenda of department faculty meetings. FPC members could circulate a survey that includes designated topics, and also prompts faculty to add topics that they are willing to speak to the media regarding.

7. Report from Don Pemberton Regarding Lastinger Center Concept Paper

Don Pemberton provided the FPC with a Concept Paper (for discussion purposes only) and a Portfolio of Programs in reference to the Lastinger Center for Learning. Don Pemberton will visit with the FPC in a few weeks and hopes to obtain feedback from the FPC regarding these two papers.

Dean Emihovich reviewed that the Lastinger Center for Learning was donated as a gift by two donors.  The focus of this center is on connecting research (from the COE and nationally) to the work of public school, particularly as it relates to raising the achievement levels of students in high-poverty schools.

Correa requested FPC members to suggest people who they would want to speak before the FPC, such as Mary Driscoll on development.  Information would be discussed before the FPC and passed on to the department faculty.  Correa also stated that open forums may be needed for discussion by faculty on any policies to be voted on or issues of interest to the College.

Clark stated that the faculty need to begin thinking collectively as a college, not just from a department perspective. It is important that we have forums and have various people talk to the FPC so that we know more about the work of the COE. Then FPC members are better able to communicate this information in department faculty meetings.

Clark moved that the meeting be adjourned.  Yeager seconded the motion.  The committee voted unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 3:45 p.m.

/by
,

20 August, 2002 Dean’s Advisory Council Meeting Minutes

Members present: Dr. Michael Bowie, Dr. Vivian Correa, Dr. Harry Daniels, Dr. Jim

Doud, Ms. Mary Driscoll, Dean Catherine Emihovich, Ms. Kay

Hughes, Dr. John Kranzler, Dr. James McLeskey, Dr. David Miller,

Dr. Don Pemberton, Dr. Dorene Ross, Dr. Rod Webb

Administrative Items

 

Committee members discussed the issue of adding a second Faculty Policy Council member to serve on the Dean’s Advisory Committee. Committee members unanimously agreed to add Dr. Nancy Waldron, FPC Secretary, to the committee. Dean Emihovich asked Committee members to plan to bring the minutes from the previous week’s meeting to the next scheduled meetings.

Dean Emihovich discussed the use of the Dean’s Conference room and proposed the

following policy changes:

  • The primary use of the conference room is for the Dean and selected representatives for meetings and college wide special events (e.g., receptions for school district people or Alliance students).
  • College wide faculty committee meetings (e.g., FPC and the College Curriculum Committee) will continue to be scheduled in this room.
  • Departmental committee meetings, FPC subcommittee meetings, and dissertation defenses should be held in departmental conference rooms. If one departmental conference room is not available, faculty and staff should pursue availability with another department’s conference room.
  • Dr. Daniels commented that the Counselor Education Conference room is often being used to hold classes outside of Education. Dean Emihovich suggested that Chairs inform faculty that no classes should be scheduled in any of the College conference rooms. Associate Dean Rod Webb will examine the issue of why classes outside Education are being scheduled in department conference rooms.

    Committee members agreed unanimously to accept the new policy changes. Chairs will inform their faculty of these changes.

    Discussion Items

    Dean Emihovich suggested the formation of a new Technology Advisory Committee and Development Advisory Board. The function of the Technology Advisory Committee will be to discuss and recommend technological resources for the College (e.g. use of software for shared scheduling, shared databases, new hardware purchases, etc.). The Development Advisory Board will help identify potential donors, assist with fundraising efforts, and establish strategies for long range planning. Dean’s Advisory Committee members agreed unanimously to have both committees act as Dean’s Advisory Committees. Dean Emihovich asked Chairs to submit faculty nominations to the Dean’s office.

    Mary Driscoll proposed to committee members the possibility of establishing a case statement for the College. The case statement will include a list of priorities, strategic long range planning and identifying promising initiatives.

    Dr. Don Pemberton distributed the Lastinger Center for Learning concept paper (2nd version) and a portfolio of programs for committee members to review. The Lastinger Center for Learning is a new institute dedicated to ensuring that Florida’s elementary schools will lead the nation in student achievement. Dr. Pemberton stated that he plans to work closely with local schools in Alachua County.

    Dean Emihovich discussed creating an Office of Collaborative Assessment, Research and Evaluation for the purposes of building research capacity for faculty and potential faculty, and to seek external funding to assess learning outcomes for university and state programs. Staffing will consist of Assistant Dean or Director, program manager, grant specialist, and a fiscal person.

    Leadership Exchange

    Dean Emihovich distributed articles from the Chronicle of Higher Education entitled “The Golden Rule, Part 1 and Part 2 (an inside look at the politics of academic careers). She asked committee members to read these for their personal enrichment.

    Dean Emihovich suggested the idea of committee members producing administrative portfolios. The portfolios will serve as a tool for doing a self-assessment. She asked that committee members begin thinking about a five year plan for new faculty positions at the September 3 meeting for further discussion.

    Future Agenda Items

    Dean Webb announced that the book theft problem in Norman Hall has been addressed and precautions are being taken. Future agenda items will include parking garage issues (e.g., when gate comes down, parking for visitors and/or graduate students), Tenure and Promotion, upcoming SACS evaluation and NCATE accreditation visit, and constitutional amendments.

    /by
    ,

    12 August, 2002 Dean’s Advisory Council Meeting Minutes

    Members present:  Dr. Vivian Correa, Dr. Harry Daniels, Dr. James Doud, Ms. Mary Driscoll, Dean Catherine Emihovich, Ms. Kay Hughes, Dr. John Kranzler, Dr. James McLeskey, Dr. David Miller, Dr. Dorene Ross, Dr. Theresa Vernetson, Dr. Sandra Witt

    Dean Emihovich welcomed committee members to the Dean’s Advisory Committee (DAC) meeting.  She asked committee members to introduce themselves and to describe their current academic role based on their perceptions of how it was defined.  Members were also asked to share why they were attracted to a leadership position.

    Committee Composition and Purpose

    As part of the process of creating a core leadership team in the college, Dean Emihovich proposed that the following people be invited to sit on the Dean’s Advisory Committee:

    • Dr. Michael Bowie, Director of Recruitment, Retention and Multicultural Affairs
    • Dr. Don Pemberton, Director of the Lastinger Center
    • Dr. Ben Nelms or Dr. Mickie Miller, UF Alliance Directors

    Committee members unanimously agreed to add these three people to this committee.

    Dean Emihovich asked committee members for their feedback on the purpose of this committee.  The following ideas were given:

    • Dr. Daniels stated that this committee reflects the personality of the Dean
    • Dr. Ross suggested that another Faculty Policy Council member become involved
    • Dr. Correa stated that she currently serves as liaison for the Faculty Policy Council and would like the new secretary to become involved in these meetings
    • Dr. Vandiver stated that this particular group functions as generators of ideas and strategic directions.  She suggested more planning and programming discussions.

    These suggestions will be taken up in future meetings.

    Dean Emihovich suggested that the committee meet twice a month.  Committee members agreed to meet on the first and third Tuesday of each month from 9:00-11:00.  The next meeting will be held on August 20.

    College Reports and Issues

    The following suggestions were made in regard to College reports and issues:

    • Issues should be strategically related to the overall vision for the College
    • The committee will identify one or two key items to focus on in order to accomplish its goals
    • Discussions will be held to determine the strategies and actions needed to facilitate change, and to identify the skills needed to become an effective leader for change.

    Discussion

    Dean Emihovich and committee members discussed their views on “What is Leadership.”  Most members agreed that leadership is collaborative in nature and should be focused on helping an organization achieve a collective vision.  Dr. Vandiver suggested that part of the committee’s work would be to engage their respective units in this process.  Dean Emihovich encouraged committee members to bring articles and share ideas on leadership issues.

    Dean Emihovich announced that last week she met with Dr. William Ditto, Chair of Biomedical Engineering, to discuss the possibility of College of Education faculty working with his faculty to improve their teaching strategies.  She will pursue this issue with department chairs who will identify faculty who may be interested in this collaboration.

    Future Agenda Items

    A brief discussion was held on identifying future agenda items.  Two items noted were enhancing collaborative efforts across programs and other units across campus, and supporting junior faculty.

    Meeting was adjourned at 12:00.

    /by
    ,

    2 May, 2002 FPC Meeting Minutes

    May 2, 2002

    Room 158 Norman Hall

    Members Present: James Archer, Maureen Conroy, Vivian Correa (Chair), Bridget Franks, Nancy Waldron, and Elizabeth Yeager

    Members Absent:  Phil Clark, Jane Townsend, Lamont Flowers, and Max Parker

    Others Present:  John Kranzler

    Call to Order:

    Vivian Correa welcomed the new FPC members and called the meeting to order at 8:05 a.m.

    Approval of the Agenda:

    Kranzler stated that he would like an item to be placed under discussion during today’s meeting related to the responsibilities of Dean’s representatives on committees.

    Announcements:

    Archer stated that Max Parker was resigning from the FPC.

    Membership of the 2002-2003 FPC Committee:

    Correa announced the new members and their length of service on the FPC by department:

    Department of Counselor Education:

    Jim Archer (2), Max Parker (1) (now resigned), and Silvia Echevarria-Doan (alternate)

    Department of Educational Psychology:

    Nancy Waldron (2), Bridget Franks, Mirka Koro-Ljungberg (alternate)

    Department of Educational Leadership, Policy and Foundations:

    Lamont Flowers (2), Phil Clark (1), Dale Campbell (alternate)

    Department of Special Education:

    Maureen Conroy (2), Paul Sindelar (was alternate and will serve a 1 year term), Cyndy Griffin (alternate)

    School of Teaching and Learning:

    Elizabeth Yeager (2), Jane Townsend (1), Elizabeth Bondy (alternate)

    Correa reminded the new members that if they are unable to attend the FPC meeting, they must notify their alternate who will attend in their place.

    Membership of Operating and Standing Committees:

    Correa also stated that FPC members each serve on a Standing Committee.  A draft copy of the membership on the Operating and Standing Committees was presented:


    Undergraduate Admissions and Petitions Committee

    Assistant Dean for Student Affairs – Theresa Vernetson

    Affirmative Action Officer – Theresa Vernetson

    FPC Member – Bridget Franks (1 year)

    Faculty 1 – Rose Pringle (1 year)

    Faculty 2 – Anne Seraphine (2 years)

    Graduate Admissions and Petitions Committee

    Associate Dean for Graduate Studies – John Kranzler

    Affirmative Action Officer – Theresa Vernetson

    FPC Member – TBA

    Faculty 1 – Elizabeth Bondy (1 year)

    Faculty 2 – Silvia Echevarria-Doan (2 years)

    Faculty Affairs Committee

    Dean’s Representative – Rod Webb

    FPC Member – Jane Townsend (1 year)

    Faculty 1 – Mary Brownell (1 year)

    Faculty 2 – Danling Fu (1 year)

    Faculty 3 – Linda Behar-Horenstein (2 years)

    Faculty 4 – Randy Penfield (2 years)


    Research Advisory Council

    Dean’s Representative – John Kranzler

    FPC Member – TBA

    Faculty 1 – Tracy Linderholm (1 year)

    Faculty 2 – Diane Silva (1 year)

    Faculty 3 – Barbara pace (2 years)

    Faculty 4 – Colleen Swain (2 years)

    Student Recruitment and Admissions Committee

    Dean’s Representative – Theresa Vernetson

    FPC Member – TBA

    Student Representative – TBA

    Faculty 1 – Stuart Schwartz (1 year)

    Faculty 2 – Ruth Lowery (1 year)

    Faculty 3 – Mary Ann Clark (2 years)

    Faculty 4 – Sevan Terzian (2 years)

    Long Range Planning Committee

    Dean’s Representative – Rod Webb

    FPC Member – TBA

    Faculty 1 – Jeanne Repetto (1 year)

    Faculty 2 – David Miler (1 year)

    Faculty 3 – Harry Daniels (2 years)

    Faculty 4 – Hazel Jones (2 years)

    Election Committee (need to appoint members for 2002-2003)

    Previous Members:

    Faculty 1 – Larry Loesch

    Faculty 2 – Dale Campbell

    Faculty 3 – John Gregory

    Parliamentarian

    Candace Harper (need to appoint new member for 2002-2003)

    Correa stated that there are four FPC slots on the Standing Committees available.  She also said the FPC member on the committees were responsible for convening the first meeting in the fall.  Committees would then elect their chairpersons.

    College Curriculum Committee:

    Correa discussed that the department chairs selected the members of the College Curriculum Committee.  The new committee format will include the secretary of the FPC as a non-voting member, one member from each department and two students (one undergraduate and one graduate).

    Agenda and Steering Committees:

    The chair of the FPC, the secretary of the FPC, and the Dean chair the Agenda Committee.  This committee sets the agenda for the FPC meetings.

    The Steering Committee consists of the chair of FPC, the secretary of FPC, and Associate Dean Webb.  This committee schedules the faculty meetings.

    Meeting Schedule:

    Correa suggested that the FPC meetings be held every two weeks at the designated time for college-wide meetings (Mondays from 2-4 p.m.).  FPC members agreed and set up the meeting schedule for the fall and spring semesters.  The scheduled meetings are:

    August 26, September 9, September 23, October 7, October 21, November 4, November 18, December 2, December 16, January 13, January 27, February 10, February 24, March 24, April 7, April 21, and May 5th.

    Action Item:

    Selection of Secretary

    Correa reviewed the constitutional language regarding the duties of the FPC secretary:  “The Council shall elect one of its regularly elected and tenured members to serve as Secretary of the Faculty Policy Council.  The Secretary is a voting member of the Council.  The Secretary of the FPC shall have .25 released time, reached in agreement with his/her chair or director, for the fall and spring semesters.  The Secretary shall become the Chair of the FPC the subsequent (or following) year.”

    Correa asked for nominations to serve as Secretary of the FPC.  Waldron and Conroy volunteered to run for the position.  Correa will send an electronic ballot to the FPC members.  The FPC members will vote on one of these individuals to serve as Secretary to the FPC.

    Discussion Items:

    Kranzler requested clarity as to what role he served on the College Curriculum Committee, Research Advisory Committee, and the Graduate Admissions and Petitions Committee.  Kranzler wanted clarification on whether he was a voting member on the Research Advisory Committee and the Graduate Admissions and Petitions Committee.  He also asked if Dean Representatives could serve as chair on these committees.  Some FPC member stated that it might not be appropriate for college administrators to serve as chairs.  The committee guidelines and responsibilities of members of the committees will be discussed at the fall FPC meetings.

    Yeager stated that she was interested in the FPC position on the Graduate Admissions and Petitions Committee.  Franks stated that last year there were some concerns with graduate coordinators serving on the Graduate Admissions and Petitions Committee.  Correa will raise this issue with the FPC in the fall.  Conroy stated that she was interested in the FPC position on the Research Advisory Council.

    Franks moved and Conroy seconded that the meeting be adjourned.  The FPC voted unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 9:05 am.

    /by
    ,

    29 April, 2002 FPC Meeting Minutes

    April 29, 2002

    Room 158 Norman Hall

    Members Present:  Phil Clark, Vivian Correa, Bridget Franks, David

    Honeyman, Hazel Jones, Max Parker, Tina Smith-Bonahue, Joe Wittmer, Stephen Smith (Chair), Jane Townsend

    Members Absent:  Dick Allington

    Others Present: John Kranzler, Rod Webb

    Smith called the meeting to order at 9:08 a.m.

    Action Items

    1. Approval of the agenda

    Two items were added to the agenda for April 29th:  (1) Waldron will report on the Faculty Affairs Committee regarding Tenure and Promotion recommendations, and (2) a discussion regarding the election of a Secretary to the FPC will be added.  Clark moved and Smith-Bonahue seconded to approve the agenda as amended.  The FPC voted unanimously to approve the agenda as amended.

    2. Approval of the minutes of 4/15/02

    “Members Absent” on the minutes of 4/15/02 was corrected with the addition of Allington.  Smith-Bonahue moved and Parker seconded to approve the minutes of 4/15/02 as amended.  The FPC unanimously approved the minutes as amended.

    3. Research Advisory committee recommendation (Ed.D.)

    Elizabeth Bondy’s concern about the language in the Graduate Catalog regarding the Ed.D. and the Ph.D. was discussed.  Differences are related to the focus of the coursework and other program experiences, the nature of the qualifying exams and dissertation, and the kinds of positions for which the student would be prepared.  Suggestions included: (1) make the requirements (e.g., qualifying exams) for the Ph.D. and Ed.D. more generic, giving departments the power to set specific requirements, and (2) make the focus/purpose of the Ed.D. more distinct and clear.

    Smith distributed the following DRAFT recommending language which could be used in the Graduate Catalog:

    Doctor of Education (Ed.D.)

    The Doctor of Education (Ed.D.) degree is offered for students who desire advanced professional training and academic preparation for the highest levels of educational practice.  Programs are available in various areas of concentration within the School of Teaching and Learning and the Departments of Counselor Education; Educational Leadership, Policy, and Foundations; Educational Psychology; and Special Education.

    A minimum of 90 credit hours beyond the bachelor’s degree is required for the Ed.D. degree. All master’s degrees counted in the minimum number of credit hours must have been earned in the last seven years.  Specific course requirements vary with the department and with the student’s plan for research.  With the approval of the supervisory committee, the student may choose one or more minor fields of study.  The qualifying examination and a doctoral dissertation are required of all candidates for the Ed.D. degree.

    See material presented under the heading Requirements for the Ph.D. for information relating to transfer of credit, minors, leave of absence, supervisory committee, language requirement, campus residence requirement, qualifying and final examinations, admission to candidacy, dissertation, guidelines for restriction on release of dissertations, and certification.  These statements are applicable to both the Ph.D. and Ed.D. degrees.

    There was a suggestion to review Linda Crocker’s language regarding the Ed.D. and Ph.D. differences.  Kranzler reminded the FPC that Crocker’s language is not related to the Graduate Catalog, but refers to dissertations only.

    Kranzler remarked that Crocker’s language regarding the quantitative and qualitative research requirements can be found on the Graduate Studies and Research web site.

    Webb stated that case studies can be considered Ph.D. work if based on an appropriate philosophical and theoretical framework.

    Correa remarked that the review process regarding dissertations was on the agenda for the Research Advisory Council, and added that further guidelines are needed.

    Smith stated that recommendations from the RAC needed to be discussed and other internal documents needed to be reviewed by the Agenda Committee.

    Kranzler recommended that a change be made regarding the context of the qualifying exam so it will be more in line with the Ph.D. requirements.  Kranzler asked, “What is the requirement of the minor and what is the process for the qualifying exam?”  Possibly more flexibility needs to be granted to departments and committees regarding the Ed.D.

    Clark addressed a comment regarding changing the residency requirement.  He stated that no changes have been made to date.

    Wittmer stated that clarity was needed in paragraph #2 of the Draft regarding the student’s choice of one or more minor fields of study.  He asked whether this required at least one minor.

    Smith suggested that the discussion be tabled until the fall 2002 FPC meeting.  Clark stated that the FPC needed to vote on the Draft.

    Smith-Bonahue moved and Clark seconded the motion to approve the language as presented in the Draft with provisions for the concerns raised by faculty regarding procedures and guidelines related to acquiring an Ed.D. and that these concerns be forwarded to next year’s Agenda Committee. The FPC unanimously approved the motion.

    Discussion Items

    1. Student Recruitment and Admissions committee recommendation (wrap up and transition)

    Issues concerning the Student Recruitment and Admissions Committee focused on (1) Proteach admissions where more flexibility in the admissions process are needed at the departmental level, and (2) the issue of the Dean’s screen needing to be changed in all departments or none. Even if students already have a master’s degree, are not required to go before the Admissions and Petitions Committee, and the student is capable of doing work at the doctoral or specialist level in the Proteach area, the student’s name still needs to be forwarded to the Dean’s Screen on NERDC to complete the admissions procedure.  The main issue for Proteach students is the faculty in the department are already familiar with the student’s performance academically.  If these students do not do well on the GRE and are denied admission by the A&P committee on that basis, the department has issues with this decision.  Wittmer brought up the 48-hour on-line program in Counselor Education.  How will these students be monitored?  Kranzler stated that the Graduate Studies office will continue to monitor acceptance to all degrees until a final decision is made.  Correa stated that the FPC needs to find an alternative assessment method, collect data for master’s only and Proteach candidates, and place this information on the agenda for the Student Recruitment and Admissions Committee.  Kranzler stated that the process can be changed, while retaining the Dean’s screen in the Graduate Studies office.

    Correa suggested that this issue be broken into smaller pieces:  Proteach, other master’s programs, and doctoral programs.  These three different issues need to be brought to the table and referred to the Student Recruitment and Admissions Committee.

    Clark made a motion and Smith-Bonahue seconded it to divide the Graduate Admissions and Petitions issue into three different topics:  Proteach, master’s only, and doctoral admissions.  The FPC unanimously approved the motion.

    Information Items

    1. Associate Dean Review

    Section 2 – Associate and Assistant Deans:  “…The service of the Associate and Assistant Deans shall be reviewed every two years by the faculty.”

    Smith stated an internal process needs to be developed regarding input in reviewing Associate and Assistant Deans.  The Provost or Board of Regents has in the past evaluated the Dean every five years.  The College Development Committee prepared an evaluation form for the purpose of evaluating the Dean.  Dean Webb stated he could locate one of these forms.  Associate and Assistant Deans are reviewed every two years.  Clark suggested that the faculty form a review panel to poll the faculty and find out if the faculty actually know what the duties of the Dean are.  Correa suggested that the FPC work with the Dean on this survey.  Webb recommended that this is a time that faculty give information regarding the evaluation of the Dean.  Clark stated that the FPC should review the positions of the Associate and Assistant Deans as part of their responsibilities.  Smith raised the question as to why faculty evaluations were posted on the web, and not dean’s evaluations.  Waldron asked, “What are the roles of the deans?  Could a survey be developed which points out what the faculty desire from the deans?”  Clark suggested an ad hoc group be developed to sort through the data and present it to the FPC.  Correa suggested that the FPC maintain archives of these surveys.

    Note:  Clark stated that all colleges are being asked to develop shared governance structures.  Clark also stated that this is a good opportunity for our Dean to display how well the College of Education’s shared governance is working.

    2. Tenure and Promotion Procedures (Report from the College of Education Faculty Affairs Committee)

    Waldron presented the report from the Faculty Affairs Committee regarding the Tenure and Promotion procedures.  After a summary of the background of the process the FAC used to develop their proposal, Waldron discussed the proposal before the FPC.  The primary issues identified by the FAC were the following:  (1) no written policies exist within departments to specify the procedures used for tenure and promotion decisions, (2) there is considerable variability across departments in the college as tenure/promotion decisions are made:  role of the department chairperson, process used to identify external reviewers, whether department meeting are held to discuss candidate, time lines for conducting department votes, (3) tenure and promotion criteria are unclear, (4) the role of the college-level committee is unclear, and (5) limited support is provided to non-tenured faculty from the point of  hiring through the tenure/promotion process.  The proposed changes you will see in the attachment to the minutes are recommended to:  (1) assure equity across all departments and candidates, (2) establish a clear set of procedures to be used for all tenure and promotion decision, (3) establish procedures that are consistent with other faculty governance roles in the COE, and (4) provide non-tenured faculty consistent communication and support as they are preparing for the tenure and promotion process.

    Correa suggested that the proposal be posted on the web so departments could discuss them and the FPC could receive faculty input.

    Clark then moved and Townsend seconded to accept the report of the FAC and that the proposed changes be addressed by the new FPC in the fall 2002. The FPC unanimously voted to accept the motion.

    3. Election of the FPC Secretary

    Correa stated that a new secretary for the FPC needs to be selected prior to August in order to establish the .25 percent of released time by their department chair.  Faculty eligible for this position include:  Waldron, Conroy, Archer, and Yeager.  The FPC will convene on Thursday, May 2nd, from 8 – 9 am in room 158 to vote on the new secretary and have a transitional meeting.  Correa also stated that the new FPC members will all serve a two-year term.  She also stated that the secretary “released-time” was not a total buy out of time.  It is what the department chair and FPC secretary agree on (e.g., one course).  Correa stated that the old FPC secretary will become the new chair of the FPC.

    Other Information Items

    Clark questioned how well the funding went for the purchase of Dean Nelms picture of Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings home in Cross Creek.  Smith stated that approximately $400 was generated of which a portion was used to purchase the picture, the frame, a $75 gift certificate for Vivian Correa, and three flower arrangements.  Smith stated that Larry Deutsch has the bookkeeping on these expenditures.

    Smith stated that he was pleased with the achievements and accomplishments of the FPC and the committees and commented that the FPC’s performance would be even better next year.  The FPC members thanked Smith for chairing the FPC during it’s first year of operation.

    Clark moved and Wittmer seconded the meeting be adjourned.  The FPC unanimously voted to adjourn the meeting at 10:51 a.m.

    /by
    ,

    25 April, 2002 FPC Faculty Meeting Minutes

    April 25, 2002

    2337 Norman Hall

    Faculty Policy Council Update

    1. Accomplishments:

    Stephen Smith reported that the majority of the members of the Dean’s Search Committee were College of Education faculty.  The FPC was able to generate a faculty discussion about the Dean’s search at the fall faculty meeting, and the FPC passed this along to the search committee when it was formed.  Some of the FPC suggestions were incorporated in the Dean’s search.  The FPC was able to schedule time with for faculty to meet with the candidates in the recent Dean’s search as well.

    He also stated that the Faculty Policy Council had developed meeting protocols, established election criteria, assigned members to standing committees, provided documentation through meeting minutes available to all faculty, and developed a manual for FPC meetings, and procedures for the operating and standing committees.

    Stephen Smith also announced that, through the cooperation with the Dean and Department Chairs, the FPC was able to establish a common meeting time where no classes would be taught by faculty for college and department committee work.  This time period is Mondays from 2:00 pm to 4:00 pm.

    The FPC was involved in the Dean’s Goal Setting Retreat and the Dean’s Budget Advisory Committee throughout the year.  Smith stated that the FPC will hopefully take its first vote next Monday to approve new language for the Graduate Catalog regarding the Ed.D., and the discussion regarding graduate admissions will continue.

    2. Report on Operating Committees

    Stephen Smith reported that the Operating Committees consisted of the Agenda Committee which sets the agenda for the FPC and is chaired by Stephen Smith, the College Curriculum Committee which is chaired by Vivian Correa, the Graduate Admissions and Petitions Committee, which met continuously throughout the year and is chaired by Hazel Jones, and the Undergraduate Admission and Petitions Committee, chaired by Sandra Witt.

    3.  Report on Standing Committees

    The Standing Committees consist of the following:

    The Research Advisory Committee, chaired by Tracy Linderholm, made recommendations to the FPC about rewording the Ed.D. narrative in the Graduate Catalog.  Recommendations for next year’s committee include:  advising Graduate Studies Office on setting guidelines for grant submissions and the dissertation review process and its importance as a function of the Graduate Studies Office.

    The Student Recruitment and Admissions Committee, chaired by Ruth Lowery, made recommendation to the FPC about alternatives to current college policy for graduate admissions.  Next year’s committee recommendations include:  issues related to the GRE for graduate admission in the College, and issues related to doctoral student recruitment.

    The Faculty Affairs Committee, chaired by Nancy Waldron, engaged in fact-finding procedures related to Tenure and Promotion.  Next year’s committee will focus on communication in the COE about criteria for Tenure and Promotion, including promotion from Associate to Full Professor.

    The Long Range Planning Committee, chaired by Jeanne Repetto, has investigated strategies for increasing research infrastructure.  Recommendations for next year’s committee include the use of an Executive Report, which outlines nine different areas for consideration.

    4. Constitutional Revisions

    Stephen Smith reported that changes for the constitution were identified and an ad hoc committee will serve next year to review and revise the constitution of the COE.

    5. Future of FPC

    Stephen Smith stated that he looked at the future of the FPC on a 3-5 year perspective.  The FPC’s first year was to explore and build, 2nd year will be more substantive with regard to some decision-making.  Smith has great optimism about the FPC’s third year of operation and beyond.

    Introduction of Award Winners and New Staff (Ben Nelms)

    Dr. Vivian Correa offered appreciation to Laurie Douglass and Susan Stabel for their assistance with taking minutes at the FPC meetings and the College Curriculum meetings.  Flowers were presented to both Laurie and Susan.

    Dr. Stephen Smith presented Dr. Correa with flowers and a gift certificate in appreciation for her hard work and service as secretary to the FPC this year.

    Dr. Stephen Smith was presented with a plaque for his service in chairing the FPC this year.

    Dean Nelms announced that Dr. Fong was recently appointed Associate Professor; Dr. Cecil Mercer has received the Outstanding Doctoral Mentoring Award from the University of Florida; Dr. Stu Schwartz was awarded Teacher of the Year from the University of Florida and was the recipient of Earnest L. Boyer International Award for Excellence in Teaching, Learning and Technology; and Dr. Rose Pringle was awarded Teacher of the Year from the College of Education.

    Dean Nelms introduced new staff and faculty:  Jimmy Ebersole, Coordinator of special Events and Alumni Development; Mary Driscoll, Director of Development; Kay Hughes, Director of Professional Development and Communications; Dr. Theresa Vernetson, Assistant Dean for Student Affairs, and Ms. Iona Malanchuk, Head Librarian for the College of Education.  Dean Nelms also mentioned that Suzanne Brown would be continuing as Assistant Director of the Library at the COE and that Cary Hunt was retiring after 30 years with the College of Education.

    Iona Malanchuk thanked the faculty for their welcome and asked all faculty to let her know what their research interests and library materials needs are.  She would like to develop a profile of the colleges research interests, new terminology describing what faculty are working on, and individual contacts the faculty communicate with.

    Dean Nelms announced the five UF Foundation Research Professors and congratulated them on their achievement:  Dr. Mary Brownell, Dr. David Miller,

    Dr. Jamie Algina, Dr. John Kranzler, and this year’s recipient, Dr. Paul Sindelar.

    Associate Dean’s Report (Rod Webb)

    Associate Dean Rod Webb discussed the recent fire, which involved the elevator shaft in old Norman.  He stated that work needed to be done on evacuating the building within three minutes (not 20 minutes), everyone must evacuate regardless of tests being given or meetings being held, and the fire alarms need to be checked and kept in working order in both new and old Norman.  He also announced the beginning of the renovation of the Dean’s suite and stated that the monies used for this construction are funds that may not be used for programs or faculty or staff salaries.  Classrooms on the fist two floors of old Norman Hall also will be renovated.  Faculty will need to teach current classes across campus until the renovations are completed.

    Dean Webb announced that the NCATE teams have met once every week.  Syllabi for courses can now be found on line and the NCATE group will begin collecting vita in preparation for the DOE and NCATE visits which will occur in February of next year.  Dean Webb stated that a mock visit would occur early in the fall 2002.  All programs need to be coordinated around a conceptual framework.  The faculty reviewed the conceptual framework and Dean Webb presented it at the Faculty Spring Meeting.  It states:  “The college of Education and affiliated programs prepare reflective professionals who organize, disseminate, and create knowledge; promote democratic values; and serve diverse communities.”

    Dean Webb thanked Dr. Correa and Dr. Smith for their excellent leadership during the first year of the Faculty Policy Council.

    Dean Search (Art Sandeen)

    Dr. Art Sandeen stated that Dr. Paul George was out of town; therefore, he was reporting on the recent Dean’s Search.  He stated that two Dean candidates had been recommended to the Provost:  Dr. Catherine Emihovich and Dr. Peggy Fong.  The Provost will submit his comments and decision to the College as soon as possible.

    Dr. Sandeen thanked the Dean’s Search Committee for their fine work.

    College-wide Elections (John Gregory)

    Dr. John Gregory stated that results of the recent college elections could be found on line as well as in a recent email from Dr. Larry Loesch.

    Dean’s Personal Remarks (Ben Nelms)

    Dean Nelms commented that, throughout the 43 years he has served as an educator, after each semester he felt a certain state of melancholy – just as he feels now at the end of his term as Interim Dean.  He said that the last two years serving as Interim Dean have been rewarding and pleasant, but he did not enjoy having to cut $587,000 from the college budget.  He thanked Associate Dean Webb,  Interim Associate Dean Kranzler, and Assistant Dean Vernetson for their very hard work.  He also stated that the College of Education is very much appreciated on the university campus and the deans of the various colleges on this campus and throughout the state of Florida are very supportive of our College of Education.  The Administration of the University of Florida also is supportive of our College and the College is held in high esteem politically across the state of Florida.

    Dean Nelms stated that the College needs to work on outreach projects in schools throughout Florida, as well as stay in touch with alumni and work more closely with community colleges.  Dean Nelms reported that through the FPC, it was apparent that faculty governance could be collaborative rather than adversarial.  He also stated that we all need to be more aware of the College as a whole and we need collaboration and interdisciplinary cooperation.  He commented that the College reputation is more important than rankings.  Dean Nelms thanked the faculty for their support over the past two years.

    Smith requested discussion on items mentioned during the meeting.  Dr. Ross stated that faculty input is needed at the Glover Task Force meeting at Lake Wauberg Lodge on April 26th, and at a public forum at the Reitz Union Auditorium on Thursday, May 2nd, at 8 am. Moving some classes from the COE to the CLAS will be a topic of discussion and faculty input is needed.

    Smith then presented Dean Nelms with a John Moran photograph of the Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings home in Cross Creek in appreciation of his service as Interim Dean.  Dean Nelms thanked the faculty for their support and collaborative efforts and for their help in laying a foundation for future faculty governance in the College of Education.

    Smith thanked Deans Nelms, Webb, Kranzler, and Vernetson for their support in the formation of the FPC.

    Dr. Phil Clark moved and Dr. Brownell seconded that the meeting be adjourned.  The meeting was adjourned by a unanimous vote at 4:15 pm.

    /by
    ,

    18 March, 2002 FPC Meeting Minutes

    March 18, 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

    Members Absent:  Joe Wittmer

    Others Present:  Rod Webb, John Kranzler

    Stephen Smith called the meeting to order at 10:08 a.m.

    Action Items

    1. Approval of the agenda for March 18, 2002

    Allington moved and Jones seconded to approve the agenda as submitted by Smith.  The FPC unanimously approved the agenda as submitted.

    2. Approval of the Minutes of February 18, 2002

    Modifications to the minutes were discussed:  (a) Page 2, Section 5.  “Article Ii” should read “Article II”.  (b) Page 3, #4a.  this should read, “…the graduate school and (not land)”.  It was recommended that if a FPC member asked an alternate member to attend the FPC meeting, the FPC member who not be recorded as being absent.  Instead, the alternate would be named as substituting for the FPC member.  A notation was made that Lamont Flowers had attended as an alternate for David Honeyman at the February 18th meeting; therefore David Honeyman would not be recorded as being absent.

    Clark moved and Honeyman seconded to approve the minutes of February 18, 2002 as modified.  The FPC unanimously voted to approve the minutes as modified.

    Discussion Item

    1. Student Recruitment and Admissions Committee

    Smith reported that recommendations regarding the Student Recruitment and Admissions Committee were emailed to all faculty.  The department chairs were to respond to Smith on behalf of their departments.  At this point, three departments have met with their faculty. The departments of Special Education and Educational Leadership, along with the School of Teaching and Learning are in general agreement of the proposed policy.

    Smith opened the floor for discussion regarding the admissions item.  Smith distributed a handout discussing the current admissions requirements of the UF Graduate School and current COE procedures.  Considerations would include:

    ·  Departments might need to develop additional administrative procedures related to admissions (e.g., sending materials to the Graduate School).

    ·  10% of all admissions may have one or both exceptions.

    ·  Departments can make “Masters Only Admissions.”  In other cases, departments may admit students conditionally (e.g., no grades of “Incomplete,” maintaining a GPA of 3.0 or above over the first two semesters of coursework).

    Honeyman suggested that we not only consider the M.Ed. issue in the discussion, but also admissions for the Ed.S. degree.  Clark questioned the purpose of the Student Recruitment and Admissions Committee.  Was the committee a checks and balances system for the COE, an artifact of an old COE policy, or a system put in place because there was a lack of trust towards departmental admissions?  Webb noted that it might be necessary to consider how the Student Recruitment and Admissions Committee could be improved to function better as a college committee.

    Kranzler explained the differences between the two types of exemptions.  Currently, the college committee reviews both single and double exceptions.  Single exceptions (those students with GPAs between 2.5 and 2.9 or GREs between 950 to 1000) are admitted by the College. Double exceptions (those students with both GPAs below 3.0 and GREs below 1000) must be forwarded to the Graduate school for final admission.  Some small colleges at UF do not have an college-level Admissions and Petitions committees, but most of the colleges across the campus that are the size of the COE do have a college level checks and balances admissions’ system.

    Two issues are at hand.  (1) Should the Admissions and Petitions Committee exist as it currently does? and (2) Should the GRE requirement be discontinued in the cases of master’s or education specialists’ degrees only?

    Kranzler stated that one problem with the departments admitting students is that the departments do not currently have access to a Dean’s graduate admissions NERDC screen.  All departments in the college would have to agree to take sole responsibility for admitting graduate students in order for a new procedure to work properly.  Each department would need to follow the university’s Graduate Policy Manual steps for admission.  To transfer the Dean’s screen to the departments would not be a problem, however, the departments would have to assume the responsibility of admitting single exceptions and providing the Graduate School with the necessary information regarding double exceptions and any “conditional” admissions requirements.

    Webb stated that it is important to consider the College rankings (e.g., U. S. News and World Report).  Many of the rankings in the national publications are based on GRE scores, GPAs, and where our graduates choose employment.

    Kranzler reported that master’s degree data were not incorporated in the U.S. News and World Report rankings.  He stated that he has data regarding GRE scores and COE rankings.  He also stated that the Admissions and Petitions Committee does currently serve as a quality control committee.

    Smith-Bonahue reported the current system adds another layer to the admissions’ process.  Some faculty have to take extra time to write letters of justification to the college’s committee and students are often required to appear in front of both department and college committees to plead their case.  The process may disenfranchise both students and faculty.  Furthermore, the process could take the onus of responsibility away from the department, especially in cases where the department is willing to admit a student and the college committee does not support the petition.  Some FPC members felt that the college committee assists the department in denying students who were not of high quality.  Other FPC members felt that the responsibility of denying student admissions should be on the departments not the college committee.  Clark requested that the FPC discuss the possibility of the Admissions and Petitions Committee becoming solely a “due process” or appeals committee at the next meeting.

    Smith stated that this issue would be a discussion item at the FPC’s next meeting on April 1, 2002.  Following this discussion, the issue will become an action item and the FPC may be able to vote on the item.

    Adjournment

    Allington moved and Clark seconded to adjourn the meeting.  The FPC voted unanimously to adjourn at 11:04 a.m.

    /by