Dean's Council Meeting

College of Arts and Sciences

May 6, 2008

 

Present:  B. Boquet, J. Borycka, K. Cassidy, R. Crabtree, R. Davidson, R. DeWitt, Joann Garvey, J. Gordon, F Hannafey, M. Kubasik, P. Lane, J. Leatherman, M. Lomanoco, J. McCarthy,

D. McFadden, L. O'Connor, J. Orman, Sue Peterson, S. Rakowitz, R. Rodrigues, G. Sauer,

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

 

Introduction

Update on Degree Evaluations—Ms. Susan Peterson reminded the Dean's Council to work with Fran Potocky, the Senior Technical Consultant for Sungard, to ensure that revisions to their curriculum are changed in the CAPP on-line degree evaluation program correctly.  Dr. Joy Gordon asked if they should forward newly approved diversity courses to Ms. Potocki, or should this information be reported through other sources such as the UCC and/or Registrar's Office.  Ms. Peterson mentioned that the UCC and/or the Registrar's Office should forward these changes; but to assure the course is recognized appropriately, it would be best to confirm directly with Ms. Potocky that changes were made.   

 

Pilot wait list for Registration—Dr. Elizabeth Boquet mentioned that the Registrar's Office will continue to maintain the wait list for closed courses until August 8.  Students will be placed into courses that were currently closed and wait listed as spaces become available.  If faculty are willing to write a student into a course, there is a new procedure to follow. 

 

Gordon asked if this procedure would result in a net increase to the class, or would these students succeed a student on the wait list.  Boquet responded that writing a student into a course would not bump a wait listed student, it would be a net increase to the class.

 

Approval of Minutes

Dr. Ronald Davidson moved to approve the February 27 program directors minutes.  Boquet asked for a minor correction to the section relative to Individually Designed Majors.  All were in favor of approving the minutes upon this amendment. 

 

Dr. Rick DeWitt asked that a change be made to the March 12 Dean's Council minutes on page 2 relative to Merit.  The changes should read that most faculty have the credentials to reach A0.  All were in favor of approving the minutes upon this amendment. 

 

 

 

 

Term Limits for Program Directors

Dr. Miriam Gogol was unable to attend the Council meeting to give an update on the term limits for program directors. Gogol asked the Dean to read a statement from the subcommittee involved with working on the proposal for term limits.  The Dean shared with the Council the following statement.

 

McFadden mentioned that the subcommittee would like the program directors term limit to be consistent with the term limits for the department chairs. 

 

Dean Poincelot explained to Dr. Robbin Crabtree, Incoming Dean, that there are 2 issues to be addressed relative to program directors.  The first is the Roles and Responsibilities of Program Directors.  There was a document created by a subcommittee consisting of Drs. Gogol, Carolan, King and Umansky, which was previously accepted by the Dean's Council.  The next step would be to address the College of Arts and Sciences for approval to include these responsibilities in the College Governance Document.  Dean Poincelot mentioned that this addition should be relatively noncontroversial, because it parallels the responsibilities of the chairs.  Crabtree asked who shepherded this initiative.  Dean Poincelot mentioned that these efforts were facilitated by Gogol.  He also mentioned that Dr. Ellen Umansky was also a good point person, because she was actively involved in the writing of this proposal, along with additional subcommittee members.  Crabtree indicated that she was not sure that she agreed with this proposal, so there will be further discussion during the upcoming year.  This will be placed on the fall agenda for the first program directors meeting.

 

Mission & Identity

The Dean introduced Rev. James Bowler, who facilitated a discussion with the Dean's Council relative to the President's decision that Mission & Identity should be an intricate part of the annual report. Chairs and program directors are required to address this topic in their annual report.

 

As the University approaches the Strategic Plan, Fr. Bowler's mission is to begin a conversation to assure that the meaning of Jesuit & Catholic is incorporated into future plans.  Fr. Bowler was seeking a focus discussion around this topic. 

 

McFadden mentioned that this could be accomplished by looking at what the department is currently involved in and seeking ways in which mission and identity are incorporated into their curriculum.  He mentioned that talking about faculty teaching in IRC and in Service Learning are ways in which a reflection on Mission and Identity could be demonstrated.

 

Crabtree did not understand why this was not already happening.  How many departments and programs are already referencing how their work relates to the University's Mission and Identity?  She was surprised that there were not many departments on board with this.  It needs directive, but what seems to be natural is not occurring.  Fr. Bowler mentioned that this is the reason he is approaching departments and programs to make sure the Identity and Mission piece is incorporated into their initiatives. 

 

Boquet mentioned that some departments have an easier time aligning work to outreach to the community and global issues, but for others it may not seem as clear.  She asked Father Bowler to respond to her observation.  Father Bowler stated that various people come up with different approaches.  While working with the chairs in the School of Business, he was amazed with their method of approaching these issues.  The types of questions they asked to assess some of the global dimensions relative to problems and inquiries were impressive. Davidson asked for clarification as to whether he should presume that the basic standard of the Mission and Identity discussion should be based on the Mission Statement on University website rather than the Strategic Plan.  Fr. Bowler mentioned that there should be an incorporation of the Mission Statement into the Strategic Plan or Jesuit values into the Strategic Plan.  He felt that there was a real diversity in this, because for some people their will be greater Jesuit values than others.  Davidson commented that the University is dealing with is a series of documents that have overlapping purposes—Mission Statement, Standard One Report (NEASC), and the Strategic Plan.  In satisfying the President's requirements, he asked which of these documents were preferred.  Bowler stated that was dependent on the field and the people within the department, so all of these documents are useful.  There is no right or wrong approach.

 

Dr. Orman asked if he should write about how they are helping promote the Jesuit Identity.  The Politics Department may be doing this indirectly, but they are not consciously reflecting on Mission and Identity.  Father Bowler pointed out that a good first step would be awareness of what the term Jesuit means.  As faculty reflect on what is going on within their departments, they will be surprised at the number of Jesuit values that are already being represented. 

 

Shanahan mentioned that he could easily describe how his department expressed some of these values.  He asked if someone would read these reports and be giving some feedback or advice as to what departments can do to enhance the Mission and Identity piece.  Billy Weitzer, the Sr. Vice President, and Father Bowler will meet individually with each Vice President and each Dean.  Follow up with department chairs and program directors will take place through their respective Dean.  Crabtree mention that the College has not done a good job of giving feedback to departments in the past; therefore, it is important to close the feedback loop and to have conversations at the departmental and College level.  She also indicated that periodic program reviews should also receive feedback. She hopes to close the feedback loop differently then it has been addressed in the past.

 

Father Bowler's visit with the Dean's Council is a beginning to these conversations to see what next steps would be helpful.  He offered to facilitate further conversations at the departmental levels, and extended an open invitation for his services.    

 

Father Hannafey asked what is meant by the term Jesuit Catholic Hire.  Fr. Bowler commented that "Hiring for Mission" is a national topic.  The first step is to define the mission, and the best way to handle this is to bring department chairs together and have a discussion on what we are looking for in terms of hiring.  Father Bowler commended Crabtree on her hiring techniques, when she was Chair of the Communication Department.  Crabtree agreed that this is a very important conversation.  It is not about hiring Catholics; it is about hiring for mission.  Once this is determined, there should be a discussion on how to manage it during the search process.  Father Bowler commented that the basis for all of this is academic freedom and academic excellence.  They are not talking about the lack of academic freedom or promoting academic excellence.  The definition for a Catholic University is to have a group that is in dialog with other cultures.  He felt it was essential to have pluralism if we are going to be who we should be or want to be.

 

Dr. Rose Rodrigues shared that she was not comfortable with bringing this topic into the annual reports, so she is not sure that she will include the Mission and Identity piece.  Being mandated to plug the Mission and Identity piece into the annual report would be a disservice to what the department does as trained sociologists and this would be problematic.  Rodrigues felt that the Jesuits do not have a corner on things like academic rigor, community outreach, and service learning, and to make that claim is pretentious.  Bowler commented that the University does not have a corner on this, but he felt that by focusing on Jesuit values, you can enhance the normative. 

 

Dr. Gordon thought it would be helpful to come up with a list of how many courses were service learning, how many involved community partnership, how many projects were directly related to antipoverty,  how many independent studies were in conjunction with the University's partnership with UCA?  Gordon felt she could include these areas in her annual report to address the Mission and Identity piece. 

 

Boquet thought it would be a good idea to look at this year as a benchmarking year in terms of annual reporting.  It is a departmental activity, and there is an inherent persuasiveness that makes it difficult to be exploratory.  The Dean's Council is a group that shares a leadership role, so Boquet felt that if the conversation addressed what this group shared in terms of their roles with relation to this goal and value of the institution and not so much about the disciplines, the conversation may be helpful. 

 

Dr. O'Connor felt that many of the values articulated as Jesuit values were found among humanists, atheists, and an appropriation of good work coming out of different sources.   O'Connor is interpreting this request as branding.  The College should be looking at departments rather than matching up activities that individual departments are engaged in that fall into the category of Jesuit.  He felt this was not coming from a Jesuit set of values; it was coming from an entirely different set of values.    

 

Dr. LoMonaco mentioned that the Department of Visual and Performing Arts already looks at the Strategic Plan and the activities they are already involved in terms of a reflection on the Strategic Plan.  She asked Fr. Bowler if he is now asking the chairs and directors to point these out.  Bowler mentioned that the idea is not just to point out these initiatives, but reflect on the necessity of the arts for a holistic education.  The Jesuit education is educating the whole person.  How would this come to light if it does not come from each of the departments?  

 

McFadden mentioned that the annual report and Mission and Identity are double conversations.  Until the College receives some feedback mechanisms, most chairs and directors view the annual report as getting them completed as quickly as possible, because it seems that no one has ever responded to the annual reports in previous years.  The annual report seems like an irrelevant but necessary exercise.  McFadden mentioned that what Fr. Bowler is calling for should be a different conversation and a different question.  The conversation is not going to occur through the annual report.  There should be a more creative way to approach this conversation.  He felt that these should be separate conversations.

 

Dr. Phil Lane mentioned that there are two opportunities for the College to put forward suggestions strategically to the Administration—departmental budgets and annual reports.  The Economic Department's annual report is used as a strategic document making their case explaining their strengths and weaknesses.  Lane mentioned that non response from the administration is a message that the College is doing "awesome."  This document should be used strategically; it is about resource reallocation. 

 

As Fr. Bowler closed, he asked that the Dean's Council to be sure to fully understand the Jesuit Mission and Identity component before rejecting the idea.  He recommended that the chairs and directors look through the materials he shared with them, which consisted of four well thought out presentations on the possible meaning of Jesuit education.

 

College Goals & Initiatives

The Incoming Dean, Robbin Crabtree, expressed her appreciation to the Interim Dean and the Academic Vice President, Orin Grossman, for consulting with her through the spring semester on some of next year's resource allocation issues and/or initiatives.

 

Crabtree addressed the Dean's Council on issues that she felt were major concerns and future business within the College. 

  1. Tenure Accreditation—There are a number of issues that were of concern relative to the College and relative to faculty and their responsibilities.  Crabtree will be looking at outcomes of NEASC visit and identifying these areas of concern.  Program Reviews, assessment, and advising are three issues of greatest concern to her.  The NEASC document expressed concerns with these issues, along with Governance and faculty performance review procedures.  There will be future conversation on these issues at the College level. 

 

  1. Implementing the Strategic Plan at the College Level—Crabtree felt that the College was approximately 3 years behind the curve in terms of implementing the Strategic Plan.  She suggested that the College look at the Strategic Plan as a blueprint for resource reallocation.  She thought that the College should be thinking about resource alignment through the Strategic Plan, particularly in the areas of core integration and Mission and Identity. 

 

Crabtree asked both Drs. Boquet and Nantz to work with department chairs to assist in taking core integration to departments and programs.  There has been a lot of campus-wide work on understanding core integration thinking about it pedagogically rather than just in terms of the curriculum.  How can we share conversations across departments and disciplines and how can these conversations move into the curriculum?

 

Crabtree will facilitate a mini-retreat prior to the start of the fall semester to discuss core integration and to see how this can be operationalized at the department level.

 

  1. Restructuring of the College Dean's Office—Crabtree announced that she would be hiring a second Assistant Dean, parallel to Sue Peterson, which has been planned and postponed for the past few years. She also indicated that she will change the structure of the Associate Dean's positions with both of these positions being rotating faculty positions.  Her reasons for restructuring were to acquire a tenured faculty member who was respected for his/her leadership and in order to advance the President's Strategic Plan within the College.  She had discussed those restructuring needs with the Academic Vice President, and her request was approved and implemented.  There will be a call for faculty interested in sharing the work of the College at the Associate Dean level.  Crabtree sees the work of the College as a collaborative process with departments in relationship to our goals—the goals of providing the kind of education we would like to provide to students. 

 

Leadership within the College is everyone's responsibilities.  Crabtree commended Boquet's thought relative to Mission and Identity, as she suggested that the College faculty look at their roles as leaders not just as teachers or scholars.  Crabtree felt a productive way to accomplish this would be to rely on existing faculty leadership—faculty who have passion and expertise in particular areas, such as core, pedagogy, and advising. 

 

In terms of student advising in the Dean's Office, Crabtree mentioned that there will be future conversations pertaining to routine advising as opposed to problem advising.  Routine advising should be handled at the faculty level and is not something that should be led by the College Dean's Office.

 

  1. College Board Initiatives—A large portion of Crabtree's time, in her new position as Dean, will be utilized with work relative to the College Board.

 

  1. Budget Issues—Crabtree mentioned that she foresees budget issues and constraints and that it is unfortunate that she will be faced with a growing budget crisis.  This is why the issue of alignment is an important conversation for future. 

 

  1. Faculty Hiring—There will be active searches during the upcoming academic year, but the number of opened lines are diminishing.  Part of the reason behind this is because of the increase in starting salaries.  The differences associated with the increase in compensation are funded by any excess funds attached to retirement lines.  These increases are necessary to remain competitive within the market.

 

  1. Workload and space issues within the College—There are a number of personnel issues in terms of work load within the college.  This year there were approximately forty non-tenure faculty reviews that took place, which was far greater than those within the other schools.  Crabtree reviewed all of the pre-tenure faculty review recommendation letters, both from the department chairs and the Dean's Office, so that she would be familiar with the performance of all of non-tenure faculty and aware of any inefficiencies.  She will work on trying to help departments assist their junior faculty consistently as they work towards meeting expectations towards tenure and to identify problematic issues that need to be addressed early on. 

 

Crabtree mentioned that the College has a deficiency in the amount of staff and space to accommodate the great differences between the schools.  In terms of space issues, she requested a copy of the blueprints for all Dean's Offices, so she could conduct an equity study. 

 

  1. Adjunct Faculty—The College will work with the Center for Academic Excellence to address special business relative to part-time faculty. 

 

Gordon mentioned that she was not aware of anything in the Strategic Plan that identified faculty research.  Out of 35 applicants, there were 30 were strong candidates for research stipends this year, but many did not receive funding.  If there was a sufficient amount of resources there would have been a larger pool of faculty receiving research stipends.  The minor restrictions did not seem appropriate as to why faculty did not receive the $3,500 stipend.  Gordon felt that while faculty are required to engage in research, as they work towards tenure and/or promotion, it seems that Fairfield is not offering a great monetary opportunity to engage in research.  The resources are not strongly available. 

 

Crabtree mentioned that while her top priority would be full-time faculty hiring, research funding would be one of her top five initiatives.  She reminded the Dean's Council that the College has the Humanities Institute Grant monies and there is a new endowment in the Sciences that was initiated in the amount of $250,000.  There are also funding opportunities at the foundation, corporate, and institutional levels.  The on-campus Directors for these initiatives are Noel Appel, Robert Cottle, and Susan LaFrance.

 

Davidson mentioned that the Humanities Institute monies can be used to be apply for research proposal, pedagogy, and conference travel.   Crabtree felt that the Humanities Institute Committee should be a rotating committee and that there will be a call for nominations in the near future.  She is open for conversation in terms of Humanities Institute.

 

Dewitt commented that it seemed that this was the first year travel monies was an issue in terms of research.  Dean Poincelot reminded the Council that the College Dean's Office funded an additional 40,000 this year towards departmental travel, and these funds did not accommodate all requests.  The Dean suggested that the department chairs submit any additional request to the Academic Vice President for consideration. 

 

Dr. John Orman asked if there would be any changes to the compensation for chairs within college.  Crabtree shared her feeling on this topic.  She felt that there should not be equity in terms of chairs' compensation, because there is not equality between their work loads.  If she could find money, she would allow departments to put together proposals for this year's compensation based on goals and work.  For example, some departments are engaged in program reviews, new program development etcÉ  She will discuss this with the Academic Vice President, but she cannot guarantee that the budget will allow for any increases.

 

In terms of the chairs selection process, Crabtree felt that collegial conversation is the best approach.  She does not believe the chairs selection should be decanal approved.  She would pursue following up on the data that the College previously collected, which stated that fifty percent or more of the department should be present for a collegial election process, a unanimous vote is not necessary, and it does not need decanal approval. 

 

Dr. James Simon asked if Crabtree had any information relative to the budget crisis.  Her understanding was that the main problem the University is faced with is debt restructuring, which is going on throughout campuses.  It is her understanding that there is a million dollar budget short fall for next year.  Everyone is feeling the significant increase in fuel prices and the way it is impacting everything. 

Demographic changes in the economy will most likely affect our admissions for this year.  Dean Poincelot mentioned that, so far, student admissions seemed to be alright, but there may be a melt down over the summer as people realize they cannot afford the tuition.

 

Orman commended Dean Poincelot for a fantastic job as Interim Dean.

 

The meeting was adjourned at 4:30 p.m.