Minutes of the 11/28/06 Meeting of the College of Arts & Sciences
Proxies were held by:
Robbin Crabtree for Leo O'Connor and Gisela Gil-Egui
Call to order: Prof. DeWitt called the meeting to order at 4:08.
Approval of the minutes of 9/20/06: Prof. O'Neill moved to approve, seconded by Prof. Bowen. The minutes were approved without objection.
Address and discussion with Senior V.P. Billy Weitzer
V.P. Weitzer began by thanking DeWitt for the invitation to address the College faculty. He indicated that his remarks would follow an outline provided by DeWitt, addressing his background, his decision to come to Fairfield, his job description, and the key issues, problems and challenges he foresaw.
Weitzer explained that he had spent his entire career in higher education administration. He earned his Ph.D. at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst in Environmental Psychology, a field that examines how the environment (physical, social and/or political) relates to behavior. While at UMass, he was invited to do some institutional survey research on students, and that experience piqued his interest in higher education administration. Since 1981 he has held a variety of positions at UMass Amherst and, more recently, at Wesleyan, in student services and in academic affairs.
He said that when he became aware of the Fairfield position, he researched the institution, reading all sorts of documents including The Mirror. He was excited by what he read, and his meeting with President von Arx further sold him on Fairfield. Since his arrival he has found that Fairfield has met and often exceeded his expectations. He has come to view the university as a well-kept secret and he expressed his hope that the new hire in Public Relations would help to make Fairfield's strengths more widely known.
Weitzer went on to explain that the Senior V.P. position has three areas of responsibility, namely, the strategic plan, institutional research, and other duties as assigned. He said the strategic plan was part of what drew him to Fairfield. He was impressed by the inclusive process of development that led to the plan, the inclusive process currently in play as the plan begins to be implemented, and the very fact that the plan really is being implemented, rather than being shelved. He also admired the plan's clear relation to the University's Mission. In his first six weeks, he has seen a great deal of energy around generating new ideas, and he sees that now those ideas need to converge and they need funding in order to be implemented. He urged faculty to keep in mind the fact that if their particular ideas are not funded, the same broader goals may end up being addressed in other ways.
As for institutional research, Weitzer noted that an enormous amount of data has been collected here, but much of it has not been analyzed. He said that we need to inventory the data and bring together the people involved in institutional research, especially Profs. Naser and Schlichting and Phyllis Fitzpatrick, in order to determine how best to coordinate their work. He argued that we need institutional research both for our own formative development, and for accrediting agencies, students, parents, and new faculty.
Under the category of other duties, Weitzer said that he is generally brought in on issues in which ideas from different places need to be integrated. He said that institutional research is the only area that reports to him. That structure was intentional so that he can be objective in helping to resolve disputes between or among other divisions.
Moving on to key issues, problems and challenges, he offered his understanding that doing his job well means helping faculty do their job. He gave an example of a recent meeting where he learned that faculty facing a problem with classroom technology might have to try calling several different people to get the problem addressed; the administration should make sure that the faculty only have to make one call, and can devote the rest of their time to doing their job. He acknowledged that part of his job, serving on the administration team dealing with salary and health care, involves difficult issues. He is eager to work on these issues, but is not naïve about the task. Overall, his goal is to promote institution-wide coordination and cooperation. He observed that Fairfield seems to be a young institution that did not always grow in a well-planned way. He suggested that the resulting weaknesses could be fixed, sometimes by reorganizing and sometimes by communicating better. He stressed the importance of talking in depth about strategy and making sure that ideas and suggestions are met not just with acceptance or rejection, but with strategically based explanations of their acceptance or rejection. He concluded by noting that the strategic plan set the direction for the institution; we now need to figure out how to move together in that direction. He then opened the floor to questions.
Prof. McFadden asked Weitzer to lay out his sense of what the goals of the strategic plan mean. Beginning with Goal 1, core integration, Weitzer noted that his previous institution, Wesleyan, has no requirements outside of the major, but it is a liberal arts school. With the multiple schools at Fairfield, the core curriculum is a great way to avoid producing one-dimensional students. However, if it's just a cafeteria collection of courses, it may not be interesting or inspiring to the students. As for Goal 2, living and learning, he observed that Jesuits have lived in the dorms of their universities for as long as they've had universities, so the issue of living and learning makes perfect sense as a part of Fairfield's strategic plan. He views the goal as finding a way to build an environment that fosters students' intellectual, emotional and social growth. To address Goal 3, Weitzer referred to his earlier comment about Fairfield's unplanned growth. He suggested that many of the graduate programs may have been developed opportunistically. It is now time to strengthen them and to consider their link to the Mission, rather than focusing on them primarily as potential revenue streams.
Prof. Mulvey raised the issue of academic freedom on Fairfield's campus. She explained that last year the Academic Council, along with the President, set up a committee on academic freedom, including faculty, administrators and students. The committee wrote a detailed and well-reasoned report with a number of specific recommendations. The recommendations involving faculty were implemented, while those involving students were sent to the President and to the V.P. of Student Services. Just recently, after an incident in which the student newspaper was censored, the faculty learned that the recommendations involving students had been disregarded. She found this outcome highly problematic and thought that because it involved multiple divisions, it should be brought to Weitzer's attention. He responded that he was aware of the issue and of the fact that the division of student services, particularly Dean Pellegrino, was being given another opportunity to address the recommendations. He assured Mulvey that he would watch the issue carefully and that he was a staunch supporter of academic freedom for faculty and freedom of speech for students. He has, for example, participated in panel discussions about his experiences with controversial speakers on other campuses.
Prof. Eliasoph, following up on Mulvey's comment about cross-divisional issues, said that, although we are all members of the College faculty, some of us teach in University College and/or in graduate programs. Noting that there might be conflicts in how resources were allocated, he asked who he was working for- his department, his program, the College, the university, etc., and how to establish appropriate boundaries. Weitzer said he found the question rather abstract, but certainly considered the good of the institution overall in evaluating proposals.
Returning to the strategic plan, Prof. Bowen asked about the potential conflict between emphasizing mission and Jesuit identity, and seeking to enhance diversity at Fairfield. She spoke of the importance of making sure that all students and faculty feel fully included and welcomed at the same time that we're promoting our mission and identity. Weitzer acknowledged this as a fair question, and talked about distinguishing institutional identity from the demographic characteristics of the institution's community. He said that he was impressed with the fact that Fairfield had a strong Jesuit identity despite the dearth of actual Jesuits on campus, and pointed to the example of Brandeis maintaining its Jewish identity despite the decreasing percentage of Jewish students. So there doesn't have to be a conflict between diversity and mission/identity, but the potential for conflict should be kept in mind. He further suggested that the issue of social justice could provide a meeting ground for people of all backgrounds.
Proposal from A&SCC to revise the New Course Proposal Form
DeWitt invited Prof. Rosivach, Chair of the Arts & Sciences Curriculum Committee (A&SCC) to present this item. Rosivach explained that the A&SCC was recommending that a request for a statement on academic honesty be added to the new course proposal form. Because that form was originally approved by the College faculty, changes in it need to be approved by the College faculty. He noted that this issue was a divisive one within the committee because of the importance of academic honesty on one side versus concerns about micromanaging the curriculum on the other. Rosivach, seconded by McFadden, moved that the new course proposal form be amended to include a request for for a statement on academic honesty.
Prof. Naser asked why such a statement was needed when the university has a policy on academic honesty. Rosivach responded that there is wide variation in what appears in syllabi, and the Journal of Record does not include a statement on academic honesty. Prof. Crabtree asked whether a short statement accompanied by a web reference to the university policy text would suffice. Rosivach said that the question of what suffices for a statement on academic honesty would be primarily left to the departments.
Prof. Greenberg expressed strong opposition to the motion. He said that it was unnecessary; academic honesty is central on any campus. McFadden, noting that the history department has its own statement regarding academic honesty on all of its syllabi, argued that a syllabus should spell out all of the faculty member's expectations for the students. Prof. Simon also spoke in favor of the motion, suggesting that it would encourage discussion of academic honesty at every level. Prof. Weiss spoke against the motion on a practical note; the form asks for course information to be presented to colleagues, not for the actual syllabus that would be handed to students. Naser agreed, noting that we might want to have a standard policy for what text appears on the syllabus, but that would not be needed for the course proposal form. Responding to McFadden's comments in support of the motion, Prof. Lang said he was persuaded to vote against the motion; while he does expect academic honesty from his students, he also expects them not to break out into fistfights, yet he doesn't mention the latter expectation in his syllabus.
The question was called (Prof. Newton, seconded by Prof. Gardner), and the motion failed, 17-35-0.
Brief presentation by Jesús Escobar on the Bellarmine Museum
DeWitt introduced Prof. Escobar to explain what the oft-referred to Bellarmine Museum is all about. Escobar thanked him for the opportunity to present, and launched into an overview of the location and the planned collections.
Beginning with the site, Escobar explained that in the architecture of the period during which Bellarmine Hall was built, the lower level was often a large, playroom space. In Bellarmine's recent restoration, that space was rediscovered and recognized as large enough and relatively inexpensive (about $300,000) to convert to a museum. The newly established College Board of Advisors has undertaken the fundraising for the project.
Escobar displayed the proposed floor plan. The main gallery space is comparable to a basilica in layout and structure. It would be used for medieval and Renaissance art. In addition, there would be two other galleries, a classroom, and office space for the future director of the museum. A class on museum installation is currently working on designing the space.
Escobar went on to talk about the exhibits that would be housed in the museum. The Cloisters, a branch of the Metropolitan Museum of Art which houses one of premiere collections of medieval art in the world, will lend us a teaching collection if we have an appropriate space for it. Escobar and Prof. Rose created a wish list of 40-50 objects in different media from the Byzantine to the early Renaissance period. Almost all of these objects have been approved for loan to Fairfield from the Cloisters. Additionally, since 1991, Fairfield has had a loan of plaster casts from the Met. That collection now belongs to us and has been augmented; it includes ancient, medieval and some Renaissance works. In 1998, Escobar arranged the loan of an example of a Spanish Renaissance painting from the Cloisters, but we didn't have an appropriate space to house the work at that point. Furthermore, the Discovery Museum in Bridgeport had a collection of Italian paintings donated by the Kress Foundation. Because the Discovery Museum is no longer an art museum, Eliasoph was able to negotiate the transfer of that collection to Fairfield. Finally, the Museum will provide an opportunity for finding rare works in our own collections, including books, photographs and engravings, along with enormous potential for outreach. For example, Escobar would like to collaborate with the Hispanic Society of America for a temporary exhibition. He concluded by noting that colleges with museums are typically older than Fairfield, but because of our location, a museum at Fairfield has tremendous potential for growth through donations.
At this point, the floor was opened for questions. Prof. Newton asked about the relation between the proposed museum and the Walsh gallery. Escobar explained that the Walsh gallery is for temporary exhibitions of contemporary art. The museum would house a permanent collection of primarily older work, though he had no objections to donations of newer art. He clarified that the loans from the Cloisters would be temporary, but would be switched out for other works.
Prof. Schwab noted that a variety of non-Western art that has been donated to Fairfield is currently housed on the ground floor of Canisius, but needs better display. An inventory of what Fairfield owns is revealing a larger collection than expected. She pointed people to the "arts and enrichment" tab on the Fairfield web site for further information about the Fairfield collections. Escobar added that a gallery adjacent to the main gallery will be dedicated to art from Africa, Asia and the Americas, and will house the non-Western art currently in CNS.
Update by Kathy Nantz on core integration
Prof. Nantz reviewed the Fall core integration events and previewed plans for the future. These events are part of Goal 1 of the Strategic Plan, which is to create coherence within the core, both horizontally (among different areas of the core) and vertically (between core and major courses). We need: to help students understand the impact of the core on their overall education; to create structures that foster discussion of the spirit and the specifics of the core among the faculty who teach core courses; and to develop a system for regular assessment of the core curriculum. Ultimately, the vision is to create a culture that places the ideals of the core curriculum at the heart of all of the programs offered at the institution.
The kickoff event was held on 9/27/06. There were 110 attendees from all across campus. They were given some information on the history of the core and asked to think about how courses relate to one another, to the majors, and to the Mission, along with what constitutes integrative learning. Faculty presumably left the event thinking about things they could do in their teaching, while the coordinators were left with survey responses regarding ways in which faculty already promote integrative learning.
The second event, on 10/30/06, was a visit by Ken Bain. He discussed generating student commitment, creating an inviting syllabus, asking beautiful questions, and encouraging integrative thinking.
The last event of the Fall was a retreat held at Sturbridge on 11/3 and 11/4. On Friday evening, groups of attendees, including faculty from across the university, administrators, and some staff, worked on developing metaphors for the core, along with questions for the core to address, related to the metaphors. Nantz then alluded to some socializing that took place later Friday night, but insisted that what happens in Sturbridge stays in Sturbridge. On Saturday the groups considered integrative learning and connections with individuals' own courses. They then proposed various levels of campus redesign projects, and concluded by telling the story of the core in a letter to parents or incoming students, or as a section of the NEASC report. All of the outputs from the groups, as well as the survey responses gathered at the kickoff event, are being uploaded into a website that will soon be accessible.
Looking to the future, Nantz explained that a major upcoming initiative involves developing faculty learning communities. This project plays on Fairfield's strengths- our collegiality, and our interest in interdisciplinary teaching (seen in the Honors Programs and the cluster courses). The CAE will be soliciting applications in the Spring for learning communities to begin work in the summer. As these communities move people forward in small groups, a second retreat and more guest speakers are planned for next year to move the faculty forward as a whole. Finally, another initiative is to get students more involved in this project. Up to this point, students have participated in focus groups on their attitudes toward the core, but in the future, some of the events will be geared toward students. These efforts may be coordinated with work on Goal 2 (integration of living and learning).
Given the lateness of the hour, DeWitt suggested that we adjourn and address questions informally to Nantz at the reception.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:35.
Respectfully submitted,
Susan Rakowitz