Tuesday, October 11, 2005
1. Call to Order:
The meeting was called to order at 1:49 PM
2. Approval of Minutes:
The minutes from September 19th 2005 were approved as submitted.
3. President’s Report:
a) Jane Evans noted that there is a Board of Trustees meeting at 3:00 PM today.
b) Evans stated that she will visit any collegial assemblies if they wish to discuss General Education.
c) Evans reported that the Faculty Senate Steering Committee (FSSC) has had frank and energetic meetings with David Adamany, Ira Schwartz and Bonnie Brennan about service at Temple. Awards, merit and workload are all related to this. The Steering Committee is working on a response which will be shared with the Senate.
d) Evans reported that a Workload Committee exists with no faculty on it. She stated that David Adamany expects the committee to standardize workload guidelines. When asked for faculty representation he said that there was no need for this.
3. Vice-President’s Report:
Lois Millner reported that we need a person for the Library Committee and two for CATA.
4. EPPC Report:
a) Dan Tompkins, EPPC Chair, reported on the Honors Program. Peter Jones, Acting Vice-Provost for Undergraduate Studies, encouraged faculty input and discussion so that there was a productive collaboration. The proposal was presented to the Faculty Senate, the FSSC, the EPPC, the Honors Oversight Committee, the Council of Deans, and was widely circulated throughout the university. There was a meeting with EPPC on September 12th, a special meeting on September 19th and a vote to approve the amended version on October 10th.
b) The new Honors Program adds an Upper division Honors program housed in colleges. The GPA for entrance is 3.6, and the exit requirement is 3.4, although there can be some variation with the approval of the Honors Director. There will be a central fund of money for which faculty can apply.
c) All Upper Level Honors students will take a research/theory course and a thesis/project course.
d) Large units can have their own Upper Level Honors Program, and smaller ones can band together to offer courses. It was clarified that these Honors courses can be a part of a student’s electives.
e) Tompkins reported that the proposal is now in the hands of the President and Provost and will be put on the Vice Provost’s website when approved.
5. General Education Executive Committee (GEEC) Report:
a) Laura Toran, CST, reported that the report with the RFPs will be out very soon. She stated that the GEEC had hoped to have it done by today.
b) Toran reported that there will be a Blackboard Website for information and input related to General Education, and stated that all faculty teaching courses should be able to gain access to it. She said to email Chris Dennis in the office of the Vice-Provost for Undergraduate Education, if anyone cannot get into the Blackboard website.
c) Toran announced that the Director of the General Education Executive Committee will be Terry Halbert from Business Administration, who will begin attending meetings immediately and will take her official role in January. Toran shared that Halbert will be wonderful in the role.
d) Toran reported that the issue of resources for General Education was raised, but that we will have the resources from the current Core. We will have to phase in the new requirements, but will start to offer the new courses in fall 2007, and can use a map to allow some new courses to count for core courses. She reported that the committee feels that the transition will be possible. We will need to have the courses designed by fall 2006. Transfer students will not start the General Education requirements until fall 2009.
e) Sally Harrison, Tyler, wondered when the majors would need to plan for the changes.
f) Toran suggested that they start now. The Board will likely have a stack of changes to consider as the new General Education program begins.
6. Discussion on the creation and composition of the Workload Committee by the administration; discussion of the role of service in faculty life:
a) Paul LaFolett (CIS): Made the following motion: “That the following statement be forwarded to President Adamany and Provost Schwartz: A committee has been formed by the Provost for the purpose of revising faculty workload policies. The Representative Faculty Senate is distressed by the lack of any faculty presence on this committee. The absence of faculty voice deprives this committee of the firsthand knowledge of those who understand all that faculty members do as a part of their jobs and, therefore, what faculty workloads really are. It also deprives the committee of the experience of those most directly able to assess the effects that new or changed policies may have on academic programs and on the quality of instruction that our students receive. Therefore, based on our responsibilities outlines in Article II, Section 2 of the Faculty Senate Constitution, we most strongly recommend that the Provost ask the Faculty Senate to provide the names of two Temple University faculty members to be added to this committee.”
b) Evans reported that Dick Englert (VP Administration) is chairing the committee; he told Evans that he didn’t see any need for faculty representation, since the committee would report to the Deans. David Adamany told the FSSC that he was interested in reducing the numbers of course reductions for service and standardizing faculty workload.
c) Art Hockner (FSBM): Encouraged the Senate to find out the facts about the history of recognition and reward for service. He feels that David Adamany does not report the facts about before he came to Temple. Hockner stated that there was not a lot of reward for service before David Adamany came to the University or since.
d) There was some discussion about workload and agreement that there must be transparency in how decisions are made.
e) Orin Chein (CST): Made the friendly amendment to the motion that there be “at least” two faculty on the workload committee, and this was accepted.
f) Richard Joslyn (CLA): He wondered if we want to lend any credence to the committee by having faculty on it.
g) After some discussion, it was agreed that the faculty representatives could make the work of the committee public and could quit, if they felt that necessary.
h) Vote on the Motion: 30 in favor, 1 opposed, no abstentions.
i) Marina Angel (Law): Moved that the Faculty Senate reaffirm our strong belief that teaching, research and service should be considered of equal value at Temple.
j) After a discussion suggesting that the FSSC bring a more comprehensive motion, a move to table this was approved with 19 in favor, four opposed and no abstentions.
7. Adjournment:
The meeting was adjourned at 2:46 PM
