Faculty Policy Council

Minutes of the December 3 Regular Meeting

Location: Norman 158 


Dale Campbell (HSOSE),Linda Eldridge (HDOSE), Danling Fu (STL), Joe Gagnon (SESPECS), Tim Jacobbe (STL), Ester de Jong (STL), Holly Lane (SESPECS), Walter Leite (HDOSE), Erica McCray (SESPECS), James McLeskey (SESPECS), Dorene Ross (STL), David Therriault (HDOSE)

Thomasenia Adam (College Administration), Glenn Good (College Administration)

Absent:  Edil Torres-Rivera (HDOSE), Shelley Warm (STL)

Approval of Agenda

James (moved), Danling (second) APPROVED

Approval of Minutes

James (moved); Linda (second) Minutes of November meeting were approved


A town meeting related to the college budget will be scheduled for Spring; date to be determined.  Budgetary Affairs Committee will work with the Dean to help make suggestions as to what aspects of the budget might be most relevant for faculty.

Dean’s Report

At the state level, some of the additional revenue may come back to education. A current concern is whether the governor will return funds to education or decide to provide a tax refund.  At the university level, many colleges are experiencing a budget crisis; due to budgetary measures in the past couple of years, our college is in good shape, with some carry-forward money available.  Presidential candidates’ campus visits will not take place until January. This allows the governor to appoint new trustees.

The Deans are meeting to look at possible revisions of the RCM model. Given the differential impact of RCM on different colleges, it is not easy to find a compromise that works for everybody.

It seems that there will be a follow-up on the doctoral Program Improvement Plan (PIP) report that was shared at the beginning of the Fall. The Graduate School will be working with programs that have been identified as in need of improvement; and a proposal to conduct a review every 5 years is being considered.

On Thursday December 6, the holiday party will take place.

University Senate Report

  1. Senate Chair Cheri Brodeur reported that the Presidential Search Committee was nearing the time when candidates would be brought to campus. When this occurs, it will happen quickly over 2-3 days. She noted that candidates will not be brought to campus after December 5 (she subsequently amended this date to December 7-9 in an email to faculty, and indicated that interviews may also be held on January 10-12 if necessary). She encouraged faculty involvement in the forums (1.5 hours for each candidate) for the presidential candidates, which will be held on December 9 (Sunday) or January 12 (Saturday).
  2. Provost Joe Glover reported that the state is considering several options for more efficiently and effectively delivering on-line learning options for students. These options include a) creating new on-line university; b) designating lead institution(s) to drive the development of online offerings; c) institutional collaboration that involves system-wide offerings developed under the direction of a coordinating body; or d) institutions developing online offerings on their own. He emphasized that UF has taken a leading role in the state and nation with regard to online instruction, and anticipated that this leadership role would continue in the future as plans for coordinating online offerings in Florida are finalized.
  3. Andy McCollough, Associate Provost for Teaching and Technology followed up with additional information on “E-Learning: UF Status and Plans”. For more information on his presentation, see his PPT which is available at http://fora.aa.ufl.edu/FacultySenate/Pages/Faculty-Senate/AgendasMinutes2012-2013. He noted that four of the initial five MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses) offered by UF will be from Agriculture and Life Sciences, based on a request from the Coursera consortium (few courses are currently available in this area). He also provided additional information (see Slide 13 of the PPT presentation) regarding options the state is considering for coordinating online course and program offerings.
  4. Bernard Mair, Associate Provost for Undergraduate Affairs, announced that the recommended date for Homecoming 2013 will be November 8. This date must be approved at the next meeting of the Faculty Senate. If this date is approved, it will result in a four day weekend, as Veterans Day will be celebrated on the following Monday.
  5. Brad Staats (Contracts and Grants) and Stephanie Gray (Office of Research) presented regarding the new “my investigator” Financial Reporting Tool. This tool is designed to enable “PI’s to quickly review financial information for sponsored projects”. Interviews with Pis suggested that this tool must be easy-to-use and intuitive, should include up-to-date information, and should look ‘more like my on-line bank account’. The developers feel that they have addressed these criteria. The tool will be available in December. For more information see the my investigator PPT at http://fora.aa.ufl.edu/FacultySenate/Pages/Faculty-Senate/AgendasMinutes2012-2013. In response to a question from a senator, Stephanie Gray said that financial information on P-Card purchases will be available within one working day on this system.

Respectfully submitted,

James McLeskey

Jan 10,11, 12 will be presidential candidates’ visits. All questions that were submitted by faculty were synthesized into 33 questions.  Brodeur encourages faculty to participate in the faculty forums.

Action Items


Discussion Items

Jodi Gentry has not yet sent her report with her notes from the Fall faculty meeting that focused on the strategic plan.

At the last meeting the question about policy and procedure regarding the Annual Review Procedures for COE Dean was raised.  The most current policy on file is from March 22, 2004. In reviewing the current policy it is apparent that some current practices align with the official, stated policy and others do not. For example, the policy calls for an Annual Review Committee to conduct the evaluation whereas currently the Long Range Planning Committee is charged with this task.

In discussion, the following issues/questions came up

  1. What is the purpose of the Dean’s (and Associate Deans’) evaluation?

The original intent was to provide feedback to the Dean and to inform faculty about what was happening. There is a question whether there should also be an evaluative component to the process.

2. What information should be shared with whom?

According to UF General Council, if feedback is sent to the Provost it is considered part of the Dean’s personnel file and hence cannot be made public.  Feedback that is not sent to the Provost can be made public internally. To date, the Provost’s office has not initiated a process to elicit feedback directly from faculty as part of the Deans’ evaluation process.  There is also a concern to be fair to the work that the Deans are doing.  On the one hand, much of their work remains invisible to many faculty.  On the other hand, a low response rate on certain survey items may undermine the ability to summarize fairly in any given area of responsibility.

It was decided that an ad-hoc committee would consider current practices and the stated policy for the Dean’s and Assistant/Associate Deans’ evaluations and align them.  The committee will also consider the question of evaluative purposes (information sent to Provost) and feedback purposes (information shared with individual Deans and faculty). The committee will present a revised policy and procedures to FPC at the January 14th meeting.  Members: James McLeskey, Holly Lane, Joe Gagnon, David Therriault

Committee Reports

Ad Hoc Committee on Academic Affairs

Reporter: James McLeskey

Committee met on Nov 8 and discussed the implications of Appendix 4 of the report on the doctoral Program Improvement Plans.  Four themes were highlighted for successful programs: recruitment, early mentoring, professional acculturation and development, and student placement.  The next meeting will take place on Dec 13 from 9-10am. Agenda item: Areas of concern as highlighted in PIP report.

Agenda Committee

Reporter: Holly Lane

Committee met on November 26th and discussed Policy for Annual Evaluation of the Dean, Jodi Gentry’s report, the faculty budget meeting in the Spring, and set the agenda for the December 3rd meeting.

College Curriculum Committee

Reporter: Ester de Jong

CCC met on November 19 and approved four certificates and four new courses.  A checklist was sent to faculty regarding syllabus and UCC form details to consider prior to submission.

Budgetary Affairs Committee

Reporter: Dale Campbell

Committee met on November 7; Eileen Oliver is chair of the committee.  As part of the strategic plan goals, the committee will engage in a process of describing what type of entrepreneurial activities the college is currently involved with.  This will create awareness as well as a need to define what we mean by ‘entrepreneurial activities’. In addition, School Directors have been invited to come to the next BAC meeting in early January to discuss their policies and procedures regarding discretionary spending decisions.

Diversity Committee

No formal report was made.  Danling Fu (member) and Dorene Ross (guest) noted that the goal of the committee this year is to use the analysis of survey data to develop an action plan.

Faculty Affairs Committee

Reporter: Walter Leite

The Dec. 3 was cancelled; no further developments to report.

Lectures, Seminars, & Awards Committee

Reporter: Danling Fu

Committee met on November 5 and decided to engage in three specific activities:

1. Institute lecture series by awardees of research awards, e.g., the UF Research professor, BO Smith professor, Fien professor

2. Collaborate with PIs on information sharing

3. Institute a Diversity Award for Faculty

The next meeting will be on Dec 7 where the committee will review applications for the faculty doctoral mentoring award.  The committee will also consider patterns of limited applications for certain awards.

Long Range Planning Committee

No meeting has taken place.  The committee is waiting for FPC committee Strategic Plan report and Jodi Gentry’s report.

Research Advisory Committee

Reporter: Joe Gagnon

Committee met on November 27 and reviewed ROF applications. The committee continues the discussion of the CRIF criteria, and linking these to strategic plan. Next meeting: December 3

Technology and Distance Education Committee

Reporter: Linda Eldridge

Committee met on November 29.  The technology needs survey has been completed and the committee will analyze and publish the results.

Other Business

Question was asked about the role of the Deans Advisory Council.  It was suggested to post meeting minutes to support transparency.  It was noted that, due to lack of agenda items, the Council has not met regularly this Fall.

Motion to Adjourn

James (motion), Holly (seconded)

Meeting adjourned at 3:07pm