MINUTES of Faculty Policy Council
Meeting Date: November 14, 2011
Call to order: A Faculty Policy Council meeting of the College of Education was held on November 14, 2011. The meeting convened at 2:04 PM, Paul Sindelar presiding, and Dorene Ross secretary.
Members in attendance: Cathy Cavanaugh STL, Diana Joyce SESPECS, Walter Leite HDOSE, James McLeskey SESPECS, Bernard Oliver HDOSE, Stephen Pape STL, Jeanne Repetto SESPECS, Dorene Ross STL, Paul Sindelar SESPECS, Stephen Smith SESPECS, David Therriault HDOSE
Others Attending: Glenn Good, Dean, Tom Dana, Associate Dean
Approval of minutes: Motion was made by Jeanne Repetto and seconded to approve the minutes of the October 17th meeting. Motion carried.
Dean’s Report-Dean Glenn Good updated the committee on the budget, which is in flux. He expects a decrease in appropriations and more cuts in 2013. Dean Good also suggested that the college is in reasonably good shape due to entrepreneurial ventures, credit generation, and online education.
Guidelines for Promotion of Full-Time Lecturers:
Moved by Jeanne Repetto that the Guidelines for Promotion of Full-Time Lecturers be approved by the committee. Motion carried.
Guidelines for Promotion of Full-Time Scholars:
Moved by Diana Joyce that the Guidelines for Promotion of Full-Time Scholars be approved by the committee. Motion carried.
Budgetary Affairs-James McLeskey reported that the committee met with Dean Good, who shared the emerging agenda. The committee is beginning discussion regarding the economic climate and plan of the college.
Curriculum Committee-Dorene Ross reported that the committee approved three courses at last meeting and will be looking at new courses and guidelines regarding certificates.
Diversity Committee- Jeanne Repetto reported that they elected a chair, Bridgette Franks. The committee has reviewed last year’s accomplishments and will be meeting again soon.
Faculty Affairs-David Therriault reported that the committee provided recommendations regarding FEOs, and tenure and promotion guidelines for Scholars and Lecturers. Next, the committee will set a schedule for meetings for review of sabbatical applications.
Long Range Planning-Walter Leite will discuss the efforts of this committee later in the meeting.
Research Advisory Committee-Stephen Pape reported that this committee is still looking for a chair. Their next meeting is December 14, and they will be looking at ROF, UFRF, and CRIF.
Technology and Distance- Cathy Cavanaugh reported that this committee has no new business to add and will be meeting later in the week.
Lectures, Seminars, and Awards – Diana Joyce reported the committee compiled a preliminary list from departments of pending scheduled guest speaker events for the college. The committee will begin reviewing nominations for the Doctoral Dissertation Award next week.
1) Generally FPC members endorsed the ideas in the LRPC report, but there was concern that entrepreneurial activity seemed to be missing and needs to be addressed.
2) The report does emphasize teaching, but members thought it was too narrowly tied to state criteria and accountability reports. There was a difference of opinion in FPC about when teaching needs to be addressed (i.e. begin discussion in spring or begin planning but defer discussion until fall of 2012):
- Some felt this is a high priority and should be explored with a task force of comparable heft to the productivity task force (e.g. need to look at teaching, programs, and pedagogy in all forms to address issues of quality). They wanted to ensure a broad definition of teaching (including distance learning, for example). They want to look at all areas of teaching and learning and mentoring.
- Others felt the college is already strong in teaching and that this might be a diffuse and theoretical issue in which we could get lost. They argued that we need to prioritize, and this probably is not where we should put our efforts this spring.
3) There were several cautions raised about moving forward strategically:
- In figuring out what to do, we need to keep returning to the plan.
- We need to prioritize what we need to work on for the spring. It is important to carve out the things we most want to work on first.
- Consider starting with low hanging fruit. More fundamental conversations should come later. Do what seems easy and doable first. Items 1, 2, and 4 (from LRPC report) are items that need to be addressed by the Dean.
- There is conflict about what is most important in the college. This is related to core values of the college. Some cautioned about jumping into discussions about core values and getting lost in conversation so that people feel that nothing is getting done. Others cautioned that addressing issues related to core values was a major theme in the strategic planning meetings and it would be a mistake if people feel this is not being attended to. The latter group also noted that core values need to inform what is done in other areas.
4) There was discussion of some things we might do to begin to explore entrepreneurial activity. People thought we might look at:
- How are others doing it? Within UF and outside?
- What kinds of activity is being incentivized by the University?
- We generate ideas and find a way to make it work.
- How does this activity fit in with all the rules of the University?
5) A final focus people felt was important was to look at infrastructure for the various elements of our work.
Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 3:47 PM.
_______________________ ___December 12, 2011_______
Secretary Date of approval