Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Attendance: Karen M. Turner (Pres.), Paul S. LaFollette (V. Pres.), Bonnie Averbach (Secy.), Robert M. Aiken (Past-Pres.), David Baron (Med), Z. Joan Delalic (Engr.), Marge Devinney (CLA), Michael Jackson (STHM), Luke Kahlich (BCMD), Stephanie Knopp (Tyl), Lois Millner (SSA), Mark C. Rahdert (Law), Joan P. Shapiro (Educ.), Joel B. Sheffield (CST), Roberta Sloan (SCT), Roy Stevens (Dent.), David Waldstreicher (Fac. Herald), Cheryl Mack (Coord)
1. Call to Order:
Karen Turner called the meeting to order at 1:10 PM.
2. Approval of Minutes:
It was moved and seconded that the minutes of February 10 be approved as amended. A vote was taken resulting in all ayes but one, and one abstention. It was moved and seconded that the minutes of February 3rd be approved and seconded as amended. A vote was taken resulting in all ayes.
The Student Feedback form results are out. There was a discussion on what method was used to obtain the results of the SFF’s. LaFollette mentioned that we have to follow up and make sure that the SFF Committee is involved in determining the formula.
3. President’s Report: Karen M. Turner
There is a new daytime schedule matrix for the fall. On Tuesdays, in the fall, classes are scheduled to be held from 12:30 to 1:50. It was decided by the members to continue to have the meetings from 1:00 to 3:00 PM.
Two years ago Turner had raised the idea about working with the administration to put together a position statement in case we were attacked with respect to academic freedom. Turner will now follow up on this issue with the Provost.
With respect to speakers at future monthly meetings
March 18: a speaker is needed
April 16: President Hart will speak
May 8: Turner is trying to confirm Chairman of the Board of Trustees, Dan Polett and possibly Len Barrack.
With respect to Marina Angel’s request to FSSC, relative to RPPC and Larry Lemanski (Minutes of 2-10-09), Turner and LaFollette spoke to Angel and found out that there was no change in the situation. Turner and LaFollette would like to have Lemanski speak at one of our meetings, but would like to meet with him first to discuss the situation.
Our next meeting will be at the Tyler School of Art.
4. Vice President’s Report: Paul S. LaFollette
The plans for the election are on track. Mack and LaFollette have met with computer services and there is no trouble with the time line. An email will be sent out with a complete list of vacancies in the committees. There have been no responses from the chairs of the collegial assemblies.
We must get people to be on committees, especially for the elected committees.
A person can nominate him/her self. A person may only be nominated by someone else, if the nominee has given his/her permission.
It is essential to choose someone to be on the President’s Tenure and Promotion Committee. Two members of the College of Education have submitted their names. Shapiro spoke briefly about the excellent qualifications of both candidates.
5. Guests: Eleanor Myers, Faculty Athletics Representative; Bill Bradshaw, Director of Athletics; Herman Frazier, Associate Athletic Director for Sports Administration.
Myers gave a general update on athletics at the university level with respect to recertification, the President’s Advisory Committee and the Academic Support Center.
Recertification is a process that every Division I school must go through every 10 years. The NCAA is concerned about graduation rates and SAT profiles of athletes, and has looked at information from classes of 2000, and 2001. Since that time, with a new Athletics Director, a new President of the University and new coaches for football and basketball, as well as a new Academic Support Center, the program has made great progress and the goal is for higher graduation rates for all student athletes.
Myers is waiting to hear the results from the NCAA, which will possibly arrive in April.
The President’s Advisory Committee on Athletics was formed at the request of President Hart. There are six faculty members and several administrators with faculty rank. Sub committees are working on admission and graduation rates, gender and compliance.
The Academic Support Center, with Director Ellen Henderson Brown. Brown recently hired two learning specialists, one of whom works full time with the football program. Special services are provided for students who are at risk of not graduating. There may be better results in a year or two for graduating students and retention.
Bradshaw spoke specifically about the results from the fall.
Tremendous progress over 2007 and 2008. Last year the overall GPA of athletes averaged 2.95; for 12 teams, 3.0. All time attendance and revenue increased at the games. APR’s (annual progress rates) have been significantly improving. No penalties in the fall due to higher APR’s. Academics and compliance are rising, and now represent the brand image of the Temple Program. The NCAA has seen a significant difference in the program since 2002. The biggest challenge at this time is to handle the present cut in funds due to the economy.
Frazier (born and raised in Philadelphia) was formerly the Director of Athletics at Arizona State and University of Hawaii and who has won two Olympic medals.
He feels that the Temple Athletics program is in the right place with respect to academics and compliance and that the sports programs will do a lot for Temple. He feels that the athletes are part of the community and have to ‘give back’ since they are an extension of Temple.
With respect to dope testing, there is periodic testing of athletes and programs to educate the students are in force. Baron suggested that Temple be on the forefront of the development of training programs for athletes and coaches.
6. Guest: Bob Zemsky (faculty member of the University of Pennsylvania. He also heads a unit called The Learning Alliance, which is the group who assisted the Provost in the planning of t he Strategic Plan.)
Zemsky is now assisting the Provost on the initiative of graduate education at Temple.
His first thought was that the assignment was to talk about graduate education at Temple. He soon realized that first step was to talk about the Graduate School. There are many graduate programs which include graduate degrees and professional masters programs: PhD, MFA, MS, MA, and MBA, among others. His intention is not to reorganize the Graduate School. His aim is to try to create a report with several scenarios and to encourage the administration and the faculty to have a conversation about what to do with the Graduate School.
The topic has now been expanded to find out what is happening to the students enrolled in graduate programs. He has initiated a study of all graduate students enrolled in Fall, 2007. He is forming a demographic map in terms of who they are and where they are in their studies. His group is also running the TUid’s against the accounting system to determine where the money coming in is going to. He is also tracking teaching assistantships.
Zemsky talked about some of the problems that must be discussed. He is trying to organize discussion and not looking at the content of graduate education. He feels that Temple is on a discovery mission and that the faculty and the Provost will be talking about this topic for a long time.
Some of the discussions could be on: What is the cost of graduate education? Who should have the Teaching Assistantships? Where do the funds come from and how are they spent? The rules are not clear now.
Aiken mentioned that the Graduate Board plays a significant role in the Graduate School. However, it is hard to assess what the role is. In some cases the Graduate Board took action, but the implementation by the Graduate School was problematic. Zemsky responded that the Graduate Board might be more of a source of Compliance and less a source of leadership.
When asked about the purpose of Zemsky’ work, he again stated that his job is not to answer questions, but to ask questions. This is a discovery mission. When the study is completed, the Provost and the faculty will receive more details on topics for discussion. There will be no individual or performance evaluations. An important question we have to answer is the location of oversight.
7. Unfinished Business:
None
8. New Business:
None
9. Adjournment:
The meeting was adjourned at 3:00 PM
Bonnie Averbach, Secretary
