Monday, September 17, 2007
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by President Aiken
at 1:45 PM
2. Introductory Remarks:
Aiken then introduced the new Faculty Senate Coordinator, Cheryl Mack. Our previous coordinator, Maxine Chisholm, will continue to work with us part time for a while.
He also introduced new members of the Faculty Senate Steering Committee:
Terry Dolan from the Tyler School of Art and Roberta Sloan from the School of Communications and Theater.
President Hart is ill today and will not be able to make the presentation she had been scheduled to make.
3. Approval of Minutes
The minutes from the May meeting were approved with two abstentions.
4. Presentation from President Hart’s Office:
Temple University will strengthen its ties to its neighborhood by beginning a new Employee Home Ownership program. In an attempt to encourage our employees to live in the neighborhood, Temple has identified 8 zip codes near the University. All active full time employees will be able to participate in this program which will provide financial assistance for home purchases within these zip codes. The homes must be purchased as primary residences, and must be lived in by the purchaser for five years. A formal announcement of this program will be made at the Bell tower on October 1.
5. Visit from Provost Lisa
Our new Provost, Lisa Staiano-Coico was introduced. She said that she is thrilled to be here at Temple and wants continuing dialogue and discussion with the Faculty Senate. There is a big job facing us, and she wants us to be her partner in the academic enterprise.
She thanked Terry Halbert and David Watt for their work with GenEd which has resulted in the piloting of sixty-nine new courses this semester.
She then discussed the purpose and the process for developing an Academic Plan. This will be one of the three related planning efforts this academic year, the other two being the development of a Financial Plan and a Building Plan. She expects much of the input in the academic portion to come from faculty. The project will be facilitated by consultants from the University of Pennsylvania.
Hochner (FSBM) asked about the status of IH in the new GenEd and what the plans for staffing GenEd courses are. What will be the mix of full-time vs. Part-time and TT vs. NTT faculty?
Answer 1 (Halbert): IH is changing and improving into a “great ideas” course.
Answer 2 (Provost Lisa): As GenEd evolves, we will be making decisions about staffing.
Turner (SCT) asked, with respect to the Academic Plan, whether there would be opportunities for faculty to serve in ways other than being on the formal planning committees. The answer was “yes.”
Gratson (SCT) asked if diversity would be a matter of prominence in the plan. The provost answered that diversity is one of our core values. Defining diversity is at times challenging. She expects us to look at hiring with diversity in mind. Diversity should be a theme throughout the strategic plan.
Averbach (FSBM) asked if NTTs could serve on the planning committees. The answer was “yes.”
The provost then announced that the study leave guidelines had been modified to be in accordance with the TAUP contract. She also announced that the study leave committee would be chaired by a member of the faculty rather than by an administrator.
Lastly, the provost said that she wants to be a regular visitor to the Senate and to engage in regular dialogue with us.
6. President’s Report:
Aiken reported that we are planning to renovate the Faculty Senate office space and updating the Senate web site.
This has already been a busy autumn. In preparation for the NCAA visit, a self study committee has been organized. CATA has been busy finding nominees for various committees. The FSSC has been preparing recommendations for faculty to serve on the Academic Planning committees.
7. Presentation by Terry Halbert and David Watt from GenEd:
Halbert and Watt discussed some of the changes that have taken place over the summer regarding GenEd. Originally, GenEd was seen as by-passing the traditional structure for course scheduling and responsibilities. This has been changed back to the more traditional model of courses and schedule springing from the deans of schools and colleges. The new system will be partially overseen by a new committee which includes deans called the GIG.
There was considerable discussion of the financial, staffing and scheduling problems that will be facing GenEd as it is phased in. These are currently being explored by the newly created GenEd Budget Task Force. The board has made it clear that transitional costs will be met, but there will also be enduring costs. GenEd is supposed to emphasize active learning, which can be an expensive endeavor. In addition, the original GenEd document states that GenEd is expected to be delivered by “full time” faculty. Three areas currently under discussion are the reduction of class size in selected courses, more emphasis on FT, NTT and less dependence on adjuncts, and more TA's.
There followed a lively discussion about these issues. In particular, it was pointed out that in the past there had appeared to be promises made about resources which have not been forthcoming, and that there is no mechanism (nor apparently plan) to provide TA’s to schools and departments which currently do not have them. There was also some discussion of the difficulties that transition would entail (can GenEd courses be used to satisfy core requirements after the core courses are no longer taught, for instance) and the problems centered around transfer credits and articulation agreements.
8. Old Business:
None
9. New Business:
None
10. Adjournment:
The meeting was adjourned at 3:15 PM
Paul S. LaFollette, Jr.
Secretary
