College of Arts and Sciences Fairfield University
MINUTES OF FACULTY MEETING, FEBRUARY 19, 2010
Present: approximately 42 CAS Faculty Members.
The meeting was called to order by Prof. Sauer, Chairman, at 3:36.
Approval of the Minutes of September 30, 2009
MOVED by Prof. Bowen and seconded by Prof. Salafia that the minutes of 9/30/09 be accepted as submitted. MOTION PASSED: 38 in favor, 0 opposed, 4 abstaining.
Update on Residential Colleges (See Appendix B)
Chairman Sauer introduced Mr. Joseph DeFeo, Director of Living and Learning, who reported on the Residential Colleges program for sophomore students, as follows.
Five residential colleges are planned for Fall 2010: Creative Life; Environment; Ignatian; Leadership; and Service for Justice. (see Appendix A, attached). There has been a high response rate to our surveys, and these responses have been favorable; students clearly value intended communities. Nearly 600 students have applied for the residential colleges for next year, which is approximately three-quarters of the rising sophomore class. A student can apply as an individual or with a friend; in the latter case we make sure that they will stay together. What we would like from the faculty is that you please, over the next two weeks, encourage freshman students to apply. March 5th is the deadline.
The residence colleges have more similarities than differences. Among the similarities:
á Specially-designed courses (Please talk to Dr. Joe DeFeo if you want one or more of your courses included in the Residential College program).
á Mentoring program. Mentors can be staff members, faculty members, alumni, or friends of the University. The mentors have really enjoyed serving in this capacity.
á Overnight retreats for reflection
á Dinner series, Community nights, and other events.
The individual colleges are not designed for one type of personality or field of study. Creative Life, for example, is not just for VAPA students.
Joe fielded questions:
á Joan Weiss: Does a student need a recommendation from a faculty member to get into the program?
á Answer: No. If we need information, we will ask.
á Bob Epstein: What percentage of the rising sophomore class has applied?
á Answer: Three-quarters
á Bob: Is it your goal to have them all applying?
á Answer: That is the strategic goal.
á Bob: Maybe we should let students develop their own communities?
á Answer: That is what happens in the junior and senior year through the Build-a-House program.
á Betsy Bowen: Are there enough courses for the entire sophomore class?
á Answer: Chairs are working on it and this will be determined soon.
á Eric Mielants: As a dinner guest, what do I do?
á Answer: Explain how one lives one's life as a sense of vocation. It is not a talk on your field of expertise.
Dean Crabtree then asked all those present who had taught in the Residential College program to raise their hands. She urged the other faculty members to talk to these people and ask them about the program.
Update on Pathways to Core Integration
After passing out a packet (see Appendix C, ppt), and after remarking that the three initiatives we are discussing today (Residential Colleges, Core Integration, Freshman Engagement) all fit together, Kathy Nantz of the Center for Academic Excellence reported on the "Pathways to Core Integration" effort, as follows.
This effort started four years ago, with the Core Integration Task Force set up by President Von Arx. The first task was to figure out what integrated learning really is, and next to identify problems and goals. We have established three main goals:
(1) to help students find more meaning in their core courses (a common perception in our discussions has been that students currently do not take enough out of core courses;
(2) to provide faculty and students with categories around which connections can be built (We have currently identified five such categories), and
(3) to organize campus events and experiences, to help students see the wide variety of learning opportunities outside of class.
Three goals that are NOT currently part of the Core Pathways Project are (1) To increase or decrease the current number of core requirements (Nantz believes there has been no groundswell of interest for either option); (2) to develop a new set of categories in which courses will need approval (no groundswell here either); (3) to finish off integration of the core (Core integration is an ongoing project).
Our five categories around which connections can be built are: Global Citizenship, Aesthetic Appreciation, Rhetoric and Reflection, Scientific Reasoning, and Quantitative Reasoning (see packet). Our hope is that faculty will be more intentional in their classes about how course learning outcomes align with these five categories: what kinds of learning outcomes these categories create for the student.
For each category there is a team of faculty, led by a director, whose task it is to provide a draft for conversation and vetting (see examples in packet). Each pathway draft will have a title, a definition, and student learning outcomes. The directors are Vincent Rosivach (Aesthetic Appreciation), Renee White (Global Citizenship); Linda Henkel and Laura McSweeney (Quantitative Reasoning); Kraig Steffen (Scientific Reasoning) and Cynthia Gannett (Rhetoric and Reflection). We hope to have the drafts for all five areas ready by the end of the year. This drafting process will doubtless discover areas of overlap in student learning outcomes, and continued reconsideration will be necessary. We are also considering a sixth pathway: the Examined Life.
The next steps are:
(1) Provide campus events to introduce and fine-tune the Pathways (panel discussion and end of semester "event" to introduce the broader campus community to the idea of the Pathways);
(2) Develop assignments/activities/assessments for courses with the support of Summer Institutes on Integrative Learning provided by CAE (see last page of handout);
(3) Begin integration into course syllabi of core pathway student learning outcomes (students should be seeing that these outcomes can be relevant in more than one discipline);
(4) Consider use of portfolios to help students reflect on their college experience;
(5) Use pathways to organize campus activities;
(6) Revisit pathways to ensure "fit" with campus culture and mission (constant revising and updating).
Kathy and Larry then fielded questions:
á Curt Naser: There appears to be no formal approval process for the inclusion of courses in the pathways. How will courses be linked to the pathways? How do I know and how do the pathways know that what I am doing is relevant to a pathway and should be included as part of the pathway?
á Kathy: These student learning outcomes for each pathway would be presented on a course syllabus so students would see them appearing in a variety of courses across disciplinary boundaries. The idea is that faculty would find ways to integrate them into their existing courses in lots of creative ways. Currently there is no plan for an approval process; faculty would not have to have their courses approved as a "Global Citizenship" course, or as a "Quantitative Reasoning" course in order to list the student learning outcomes on the syllabus.
á Larry: It is to be hoped that this work begins at the departmental level; departments might discuss collectively how various courses address the various pathways.
á Ron Davidson: These pathways look skewed towards social sciences and away from humanities. Although humanities subjects form the greatest part of the core, this looks like a capture of the Humanities core by the Social Sciences.
á Kathy: We need to encourage people to see that these goals are much broader than simply the categories of humanities and social sciences. The point of the pathways is to provide sites for integrative and interdisciplinary work. Student learning outcomes in "Global Citizenship" or "Rhetoric and Reflection" certainly might be approached in courses from Humanities disciplines. If Humanities faculty find they are having a difficult time finding student learning outcomes for their courses in the current set of Pathways, then it will be important to come up with a better set of Pathways. In response to the suggestion from the Religious Studies and Philosophy departments last fall, a new pathway titled, "The Examined Life", is being considered by the working group of directors and by the SVPAA.
Update on New Freshman Programs for Engagement/Retention
Beth Boquet, Dean of the Office Academic Engagement, and Deb Cady Melzer, Dean of Student Development, reported on the New Freshman programs, as follows:
We want to create synergy and common projects between Student Affairs and Academic affairs. We have had lots of pilot programs over the past few years. We want to show you how the three big efforts being updated for you today (Residential Colleges, Core Integration, Freshman Engagement) connect together.
1) Improvements to Orientation:
We need to think about the messages we send to prospective students (intentionally or unintentionally) at Orientation. Between May 1st and late June Fairfield University sends a dozen pieces of mail to these students, and none of these pieces are coordinated. We need a consistent and coherent message. June Orientation should be for setting up course schedules, for emphasizing academic excellence, and for telling students about the classroom experience: in short, for giving students what they need to make informed decisions about their academic career at Fairfield. What are we teaching students through our very early communications with them? It should be how we form habits of mind for learning. What sort of message does Orientation send to students as to how they should proceed as students at Fairfield? We want them to be able to take responsibility for their own decisions.
We have run an International Student and Transfer Student Orientation pilot program in January. We want to make it a more expansive experience. Peer advisors were recruited for every student who has transferred here from other U.S. universities. We also want to get away from the notion of separate cohorts, integrate student populations (i.e. international students, transfer students) more effectively and stress connections to the rest of the academic experience. The Office of New Student Programs coordinates the First-Year Experience program and other initiatives. Streamlining through this office is necessary.
2) First Year Transition:
Organization: We wanted to look at resources for a centralized advising office. The Dean of Freshmen handles first-year students; then advising gets increasingly decentralized during the sophomore year and beyond. We saw that it made sense to use our centralized advising resources to support "exploring students" (undeclared). Our office is now working with sophomores more. All students continue to be assigned a faculty advisor upon arrival. Students should be connected to faculty advisors, departments, and schools as soon as possible. However, when students are still exploring, we need to have a place to coordinate support and retention/academic success efforts.
3) Convocation:
What are we trying to accomplish? Should we move toward a university-wide convocation, rather than focusing on the first-years? It might be more like Commencement. How do rites and ritual engage students? How shall speakers be selected? Do we always want to choose the author of a book? We want to focus on cross-disciplinary subjects. We will be soliciting suggestions, and are not presuming anything at this point.
4) Mentors:
We see an expanding role for student mentors; these are juniors and seniors, each of whom works with a group of 15-20 first-year students. Our upperclass students have really latched on to this experience. Of particular interest is Study Abroad.
5) Residence:
We are working to house first-year students together by courses so that faculty (once they know that students are housed together) can coordinate student experiences in their classes. Study groups? What kind of ideas do people have concerning opportunities for engagement on the faculty's part? There is student "space" and faculty "space"; how do we bridge it?
6) Workshops:
Please register for CAE workshops. The Office of Academic Engagement is co-sponsoring several advising workshops with CAE this semester. What are you interested in? This week we have Kathy Manning, an expert on campus ritual, who will be of particular assistance in re-thinking convocation.
Beth and Deb then fielded questions:
á Bob Epstein: Will there be a change in the way that students are assigned to advisors?
á Answer: Students were previously assigned at Orientation. Henceforth we will be looking at a more restricted role for Orientation; we'll assign students to advisors at the beginning of the academic year. Students will also have a peer contact before, during, and after June Orientation.
Update on College Governance Document Revisions:
Associate Dean Joan Weiss handed out a hardcopy report (see Appendix A, attached), and elaborated on it, as follows:
The Task Force for Governance Document Revisions was formed in September, and has been working on them since. I will ask for input from the faculty after going over the items in this printed report.
á General "Editorial" Changes: nothing unusual here.
á Potential Updates: We are looking for input. Should the UCC election procedure be the same as that for AC (i.e. the College chooses its own representatives)? Should the election of ASCC members be modified?
á Arts and Sciences Awards Committee: Should it be changed to four Humanities, four Social Sciences, and four Natural Sciences as is the current practice, as opposed to six Humanities, three Social Sciences, and four Natural Sciences?
á Responsibilities of the Chairpersons, Interdisciplinary Program Directors, etc.: there are redundancies.
á Bylaws: these are local procedures that a department or program will create for itself; for example, the English Department has a procedure in place for choosing the Writing Center Director. Shall we put a proviso on bylaws into the Governance Document, to make sure that each department has bylaws in place?
á Term limits for department chairs? Fifty percent of the faculty surveyed indicated, at the most, two consecutive terms.
á Job description for the Dean: it is outdated in a number of ways and probably should be indicated as a referenced document
á Other parts of the Appendices section: do they need to be in the Governance Document?
Joan then fielded questions:
á Joe Dennin: Has there been any discussion on procedures to award merit?
á Answer: Dean Crabtree will address this.
á Cecelia Bucki: Is there a committee dealing with Governance Document revisions?
á Answer: Yes. The task force members are Glenn Sauer, Bill Abbott, Matt Coleman, Robert Epstein, and David McFadden. I chair the Task Force.
á John Lasseter: Why an entry for "Procedures for Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure"? Is there an argument for keeping it there?
á Answer: No.
Please send comments to Joan.
Announcement: Mark Scalese: There will be a panel discussion on Thursday, March 4th, from 3:30 to 5:00, in the Library Multimedia Room, on the latest issue of Conversations in Jesuit Higher Education about "Reaching the Millennial Soul." In particular, the panel will focus on an interview with Donna Freitas, author of Sex and the Soul, which seems pretty timely in light of the fracas last semester over the "He Said/She Said" column in The Mirror and the glimpse it provided of the "hookup culture" on campus."
Remarks from the Dean
Dean Crabtree began by thanking all department chairs and program directors for all of their fine work ; they are certainly not compensated well enough for all that they do. Dean Crabtree also expressed appreciation for the work of Bob Epstein and Shannon Harding on the College of Arts and Sciences Curriculum Committee. The A&SCC has been working harder than ever, vetting courses. The CAS Planning Committee has set a good agenda.
With regard to the Governance Document, the Dean's job description is really out of date. We need to ask ourselves what should be in the Governance Document and what not, and what the purviews of the Dean and AVP should be. Many thanks to Dean Joan Weiss for heading up this revision effort. Please read the Governance Document and send Joan any questions and comments.
Thanks too to Glenn Sauer, CAS chairman, and Bill Abbott, CAS secretary.
Although we will recognize CAS faculty accomplishments more fully at the April meeting, I want now to recognize two NEH Fellowship winners: Ron Davidson and Joy Gordon. To have two NEH winners in one year is most unusual, and says a great deal about our College. Ron Davidson has also received an award from the American Council of Learned Societies.
I have been going over the Rank and Tenure reviews, and they confirm that we have a truly amazing faculty. SVPAA Fitzgerald has also had an opportunity to go over these applications.
Jean Daniele will be soliciting copies of all books and other publications by CAS faculty since last April's meeting.
CAS departments have conducted five searches this year. Communication, Economics, Modern Languages, and History all got top candidates after good courtship efforts. We have also been looking at Jesuit candidates, and two offers have gone out. These processes have been rigorous; not all of the Jesuit candidates were given offers.
On enrollment, we are shooting for a class of at least 925, and hopefully 940, to make up budget losses. This is similar to 2004. Other news: Business School applications are down, and not just at Fairfield; this is a national trend. Nursing and Engineering application, however, are up. On the new class, retention is better than expected, although transfers are not; only 20 instead of the hoped-for 30. Our yield continues to decline, although this is in large part a result of online applications; students can now apply inexpensively to more places, so they do. Applications to Fairfield by students of color have held steady, while applications to Xavier have gone down. Our applicant pool is now 20% people of color. Our retention rate for students of color has gone up, from 63% to 80%. We are definitely looking more diverse.
But, we need our 925-940 students next year: otherwise, lots of budget woes. Cuts are possible; be prepared. Last year non-tenure-track faculty were "privileged" (i.e. spared most of the cuts), while other sections of the employee pool were cut. We cannot keep cutting the latter; non-tenure-track faculty are next in line to suffer cuts, and everyone cannot be saved. However, we are holding on to our replacement tenure-track lines (though not necessarily open-salary). No sign yet that this will change. Add-on lines are still possible, to be brought in from graduate-school revenues. A salary increase is unlikely for this year (only standard if anything).
Strategic work by the College: all these various initiatives are moving forward, and they are related to each other. We are trying to create a confluence, linking them together into one project. In answer to Curt's and Ron's questions (see above), departments should be having conversations: "What do these core pathways mean to our courses?" Departments should take ownership of these pathways: integrate them for yourselves. Think of vertical as well as horizontal integration; i.e. connect the core with your major as well as core courses with other core courses. In thinking about any new initiative, ask (1) How does it relate to earlier initiatives? and (2) What does it mean to our department? What is our ownership of it? What is our responsibility?
College Board of Advisors (one which alumni and donors sit): students have spoken to the Board, making presentations on Living and Learning and on Global Citizenship. More events are planned, involving other faculty members. There is now a $150,000 Science Institute fund. Many thanks to Renee White.
Question of a possible College wide merit plan/process will be taken up at March meeting.
Celebrate our accomplishments!
There were no questions of Dean Crabtree.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:02.
Bill Abbott
Appendix A
College of Arts and Sciences Governance Document
General "Editorial" Change:
--All "Academic Vice President" to "Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs"
--Most "Programs" to "Interdisciplinary Programs"
--Other editorial (probably mostly noncontroversial) changes
--incorporate all recent approved change(s)
--Council of Graduate Programs and Responsibilities of Graduate Program
Directors [approved at 4/22/09 CAS meeting]
Potential Updates:
--College Curriculum Committee
Name? Currently is usually called ASCC not CCC.
Election of members? Currently UCC members elected by the General Faculty Should only the CAS faculty elect the members? Since the UCC and AC
have the same membership composition, maybe the UCC members
should be elected by their schools/College as is the current practice for the AC.
Purpose and duties: Include graduate programs, etc.
--Arts and Sciences Awards Committee
Membership
-Arts and Sciences Planning Committee
Membership, election
Function or Charge
--The Responsibilities of the Chairperson (1.7.1 – 1.7.15), Responsibilities of the Program Directors
(1.11.1 - 1.11.20) and Responsibilities of the Graduate Program Directors
Revamp for consistency; Merge? Move to an appendix?
--Should Departments and Programs have bylaws?
--Should there be limits on consecutive terms for department chairpersons? (2 consecutive terms?)
Appendices?
--Job Description of the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences -- Update –
Maybe "general duties" could be described in section 2.0 and a current detailed job
description in an appendix
--Procedures for Appointment, Promotion and Tenure—Update; Remove & reference University Doc
--College of Arts and Sciences Department Chair Compensation
--Guidelines to Hiring Jesuits
--CAS Merit Guidelines and Timeline
Referenced University Documents:
Fairfield University Faculty Handbook
Fairfield University Timetable and Guidelines for Tenure and Promotion
Fairfield University Guidelines for Faculty and Academic Contract Staff Recruitment
2/19/2010
JW
Appendix B
Sophomore Residential Colleges
Fall, 2010
Fairfield University
Application Information: One common, online application. www.fairfield.edu/LLC
Application deadline March 5, 2010.
Questions? Email at rescolleges@fairfield.edu or
Joe DeFeo,
Ph.D., Director
of Living and Learning, jdefeo@fairfield.edu
ext. 2147
How
to get involved? Teach
Mentor
Office Hours in the Community Course
Enhancement Funds
Dinner Guest
Connect with Students