Dean's Council Meeting

College of Arts and Sciences

December 3, 2008

 

Present:  E. Boquet, A. Harkins, D. Keenan, M. Kubasik, P. Lane, J. McCarthy,

D. McFadden, K. Nantz, J. Orman, S. Peterson, D. Quintiliani, L. Porter, R. Rodrigues, G. Sauer,

J. Simon, J. Shanahan, M. Sourieau, D. Winn

 

Not Present: M. Coleman, N. Dallavalle

 

The meeting convened at 4:00 p.m.

 

Minutes

Approval of Minutes—Dr. Matthew Kubasik requested a revision to the November 5 minutes

on page three clarifying that the participant at the American Chemical Society Conference was

Dr. Ed O'Connell. All were in favor of the minutes upon this amendment with the exception of one abstention.

 

Announcements

Department Representative—The Dean announced that when department chairs are not available to attend a Dean's Council meeting, a representative should be present. There are important topics and/or decisions that are discussed during these meetings that should be shared at the departmental level.

 

Budget Requests—The Dean informed the chairs that she submitted the College-wide budget with requests pertaining to the following:

·      An increase in chairs' stipends to an appropriate level

·      Startup funds in terms of assuring funds are available for commitments made

·      Equipment service contracts

·      Faculty travel

·      Equipment and other operating needs relative to instruction were forwarded to the Academic Vice President in a prioritized list for consideration.

·      Smaller requests may be covered by the Dean's Office during the academic year 2009 and 2010 dependant on availability of funds.

 

Although the Budget Committee asked that no new request for additional monies be made, the Dean felt that some of her requests were relative to outstanding commitments. Some of these, particularly visiting instructors in areas such as biology to teach courses for nurses, are commitments made annually where financial support was not earmarked. As the University anticipates a new Academic Vice President, contingency based and/or ad hoc based funding for these types of initiatives may not be the future preference. Permanent funds may be distributed to cover these commitments, which would be more productive in terms of managing expenditures.

 

Relative to faculty lines, the Dean requested the following:

• Approval for all lines vacated due to retirement and/or resignations within the College
• Continue visiting lines that are currently active
• Additional visiting lines for departments who are faced with a large number of faculty sabbaticals and/or pre-tenure leaves
• The Dean anticipates no funds will be remaining for new lines this year

 

Travel Budgets—The Dean asked department chairs to work with their program assistant to manage their travel budgets more closely. Although travel requests are managed by department chairs in terms of prioritizing approval of requests, before expense reports are submitted to the Dean for signature, program assistants should work with faculty to assist them in filling out the expense reports correctly.

 

Department chairs should determine what they feel are appropriate expenses for conference travel and discuss this with their faculty. The College is faced with managing travel by utilizing the same funds, yet higher costs; therefore, it was recommended that chairs ask their faculty to be cautious when planning travel related initiatives. Sharing a room with a colleague, and/or evaluating the cost of renting a car or taking a train opposed to driving (mileage reimbursement and parking fees may be more expensive than rental or train), could result in considerably lower costs. Managing travel funds to optimal use is in the best interest of the department, where vigilance may offer the opportunity for department chairs to approve additional conference requests. In addition, the Dean reiterated the policy for per diem allowance. On travel days, full per diem is not appropriate—either breakfast/lunch – or – lunch/dinner is reimbursable.

 

Phone Bills—The Dean recommended that department chairs have a conversation with their faculty to discuss what they feel is appropriate in terms of phone use, especially for those faculty who are engaged in international research. Because these funds are taken out of departmental budgets, having a policy or expectations that are appropriate would be beneficial to the department.

 

Discussion of Core Integration work in Departments

Dr. Kathryn Nantz shared the Core Integration Initiative Update Report with the Dean's Council to determine where the University was in terms of the institutionalization of core integration. A timeline was distributed indicated the progress of this initiative.

 

Core integration is an on-going project with a focus on how we can institutionalize the process of engaging core with the same intensity as departments engage with their own majors. Presently there is a lot of curricular development surrounding the major—developing new courses and seminars, student activities, internships, and/or independent studies. Even though some departments engaged in intensive conversations about the core, they have not focused on the integration piece. The questions of how they could make core courses more relevant to other courses within students' core or other courses students are engaged in within their own majors is important. The goal behind the concept of core integration is to see an equal engagement in departments with core curriculum development, such as pedagogical and content related initiatives, to keep core courses as fresh and vibrant as many of the major courses.

 

Dr. Nantz mentioned that there was a variety of activity going on throughout various departments in terms of core integration. Drs. Boquet, Miners, Nantz and Torosyan are actively visiting departments to engage in discussions on how they are thinking about moving forward with more integrated teaching strategies. The goal is to meet with each department by the end of spring 2009 semester. Dr. Boquet asked department chairs to contact Ms. Jean Siconolfi, ext. 2223, to schedule visits.

Nantz introduced a model that would help in developing partnerships and defining responsibilities. The structure would help keep faculty engaged in the process of ongoing consideration to integrate teaching and learning. The model describes an overlapping responsibility between the Director of the Core and the Center of Academic Excellence, College of Arts and Sciences Dean's Office and CAS departments and programs, and the UCC. Responsibilities should be as follows:

• The Director of the Core and CAE is a place where a lot of innovation occurs. Resources are available for innovation to develop new courses or courses to include new pedagogies.
• The College of Arts and Sciences Dean's Office should be responsible for facilitating the delivery of the core from practical perspective thinking about how departments understand their responsibilities.
• The integration of teaching and learning should occur at the department and program level.
• The UCC should engage the rest of the institution in conversation about core courses and requirements. They oversee the core requirements and are responsible to assure that core courses meet core learning objectives.

 

The floor was opened for discussion among department chairs.

• Boquet mentioned that chairs should think beyond the courses they are teaching and their individual syllabi and focus on linking these courses to what is happening within the curriculum, the core, and how this connects to the larger institutional strategic goals.
• Dr. Rose Rodrigues mentioned that many of the Sociology courses fulfill the core. She shared a handout listing courses that are interdisciplinary courses, cluster courses/learning communities, courses across the core based on a student's interest, and courses that count and/or are listed with interdisciplinary programs. The department took the initiative to discuss students' interests, both majors and non-majors across the curriculum, to find out their interests, so they could recommend connecting their interest to an array of Sociology courses that are integrative with other departments, such as History, Psychology, Biology, Religion, and International Studies.
• Nantz met with FUSA and learned that students are seeking ways to make the core more personal. The Fairfield University web site could be a great resource by featuring a link that would allow students to indicate their interest and have an array of course selections within many disciplines retrievable. This source of information is not only useful in terms of students searching courses of interest, but also for student advising purposes.
• Dr. Orman noted that students are not required to take a Politics course; therefore, the department does not have "core protection." Given this environment, the Politics department counts all 100 level courses as core. Orman thought it may be beneficial to focus on making PO 11, 12, and 14 as their premier core courses. The department is considering sharing syllabi with colleagues within the department for the first time in twenty-eight years, so they could compare their course materials and learning objectives.
• The History Department engaged in a summer seminar over the past few years reviewing their curriculum beginning with HI 30 and moving onto the 200 level courses. They discussed the relationship between their major and the core. They revised subgroups within the department—the Europeanists, Americanists, and non-westerners—and began to evaluate what they are teaching and whether these courses result in what they expected. Because all full-time faculty are teaching HI 30, the department paired sections of HI 30 having a course enrollment of 50 students. Faculty within the department invite colleagues into their courses for special lecturers to share their specialties with the students. It is encouraged among colleagues to teach to their strengths.
• Boquet emphasized the importance of utilizing colleague's expertise to assist in moving students forward in a greater capacity. There are times where faculty may find themselves beyond their comfort zone. The tension between expertise and experimentation is important and is at the heart of the integrated model—drawing on the expertise in a way that allows risk taking. Dean Crabtree added that it is important to think not only about content but about pedagogy, because at times the important factor is not what is being taught rather how it is taught.
• Dr. Jim Simon mentioned that with the large number of English Department faculty—21 full-time and 33 part-time—they experienced problems with focusing and unifying their faculty. An outside consultant assisted them in getting their faculty to move in the same direction. With a focus on reviewing EN 11 and EN 12 there was a positive outcome of obtaining a new hire—Dr. Cinthia Gannett. At present there are forty generic sections of EN 11. Simon recommended that the department focus on finding out what other disciplines require and convert some of these sections into integrative writing courses with History, Religious Studies, Communication, etc… Simon noted that while many English faculty state that they are only teaching the core, the English Department has not differentiated literature courses between core and non core courses. Simon felt that this will change soon reducing the number of literature courses that will be counted as core literature, and leading to more coherence among those.
• The Psychology Department engaged in an analysis to determine what undergraduate students should be exposed to in preparing them to engage in Psychology as a profession. As the department thinks about the core, the Biological Basis of Behavior is a co-taught course that can be used to cover a science core. Faculty within the department consult with each other on their teaching methods to assure coverage of similar course material. In the past, the department utilized the expertise of others to assist in teaching specific subject matters. This was most helpful in the general psychology courses, because each chapter has its own subfield; however, logistically it was difficult in terms of determining the right timing with faculty schedules, and which faculty should run the course, and receive credit for teaching the course. This complexity of this style was difficult; therefore is not used very often. Psychology is inherently integrative with other disciplines and these core courses fill up rather quickly. A recommendation was made to cluster these courses to accommodate the interest of the students. McCarthy has strong feelings about the core and he felt that it is the responsibility of the professors to encourage students to develop a Liberal Arts way of thinking—how one course relates to another course within multiple disciplines.
• McCarthy mentioned that he had difficulty teasing out discussions between integration of major and core courses. The Dean explained that horizontal integration is thinking about the way core courses intersect with each other, while vertical integration is when the core is integrated with the major and then moved forward incorporating these experiences with professional and personal lives.
• Dr. Glenn Sauer mentioned that the sciences have been working on their core integration project for a long time. Science core is evaluated by the core science committee to assure three criteria are met—scientific method, handling and analyzing data, and laboratory experience. The Biology Department utilized an assessment plan appraising the outcomes based on these criteria. Sauer found that the majority of students are waiting until junior or senior year to take a science core. In terms of vertical integration, he would like to create a way to capture student interests at the earlier stages of their educational careers giving them the tools to use a scientific reasoning approach throughout their college careers. IRC offers a Biology option giving students this experience during their sophomore year. Nantz suggested that the sciences partner with other courses in the core to accomplish a greater level of integrative work. This can be achieved by offering more core clusters.
• Dr. Dennis Keenan mentioned that the Philosophy Department found it helpful to work with Dr. Debnam Chappel, Dean of Freshmen, to reserve spaces within the core courses for freshmen students. This is a good way to seed some of the freshmen into these courses.
• Nantz mentioned that decisions being made on how many seats and times codes for core courses should include discussions with the College Dean's Office and the Dean of Freshmen. Chairs generally work at the department level in determining these decisions, but integrating decisions on a broader level offers greater opportunities in capturing students at earlier stages. Keenan suggested the use of Dr. Curt Naser's database to determine how many students already satisfied different sections of the core. This data gives a sense of how many seats are needed to fulfill core at the department level.
• The majority of the core courses in the Department of Modern Languages and Literatures are taught by part-time faculty. Relying on 30 adjuncts is challenging. There has been discussion about integrating the core and engaging in common activities within the department, and cluster courses. The department is sharing a lot of ideas through utilizing common syllabi, observation of classes, and regular meetings.
• In VPA there are five different programs and in many ways they operate as five different departments. Dr. Lynne Porter is learning that there are great things happening within each of the programs, and she organized round table luncheons giving the opportunity for colleagues to share their ideas and/or discuss different topics collegially. She is trying to find ways to encourage faculty to look at how and what the department is doing as a whole. VPA has a lot of scholarly "left brain" courses and also "body oriented" courses—painting, acting, and dance—that are also an important way to think. In looking at assessment and integration there is a challenge in dealing with the body centered courses. She is trying to determine where she can obtain resources to figure out ways in which VPA could integrate the core.
• Dr. Phil Lane mentioned that Economics only has two courses in the core EC 11 and EC 12, which is dictated to the Dolan School of Business. Introductory Micro and Macro Economics have the same outcomes with a common curriculum. Some of these courses are clustering with other core courses.

 

The Dean thanked everyone for sharing their progress, noting that there are many good ideas being implemented. She encouraged departments that have not yet met with the core integration team to do so, and reminded everyone about using the Humanities Institute to seed department-level work on core integration over the summer. Nantz added that her budget also has resources for this type of work.

 

The meeting adjourned at 5:15.