March 24, 2004
RA provided an overview of proposed changes to the bylaws. Departments were surveyed last Spring, and there was consensus across departments at that time supporting the participation of lecturers on four committees: Nominations & Awards; Library; Academic Appeals; and Technology. The ballot will go out to the SOS faculty by mail in April. RA opened the floor to discussion.
There was a question regarding the differences in wording for some of the
committees.
There was a question as to whether faculty in scientist ranks could serve on these committees. RA said that they are not currently allowed, and that this might be an issue to be reviewed because the definition of voting faculty member in the Faculty Handbook differs from the SOS Bylaws.
RA encouraged faculty to respond to their SOS Steering Committee with any further comments by Friday, at which time the ballot will be drafted and finalized.
II. Proposed Bylaws Changes: Administrative Reviews
RA provided an overview of proposed changes to the bylaws. Steering Committee representatives solicited input from all departments several times. The proposed changes reflect that input.
RA proposed to send out only the changed sections of the Bylaws (and not the entire Bylaws) in the mail ballot.
A question was raised as to whether lecturers would be permitted to participate in the administrative reviews. RA replied that the current wording does not include lecturers. That would need to be addressed in a subsequent revision.
III. Dean Search
Pam Crowell (PC), Greg Fetterman (GF), and Andy Gavrin (AG) attended the Assembly as representatives from the Dean Search Committee. There was a question about how the faculty feedback forms were being processed. AG reported that Debbie Crowley has maintained them securely. They are shared with the committee during their meetings but collected at the end of the meeting so that the forms do not circulate outside the Committee. Signatures are not required on the feedback forms; consequently, the responses are not tabulated or tallied in any numerical fashion (e.g., by rank); instead the input is weighted informally for signed vs. unsigned.
AG stated that the committee intends to send only 3 names. They are not allowed to formally rank order the candidates, but they will provide qualitative feedback that will characterize their recommendations.
One person asked how would faculty input be weighted in the choice? AG reported that all input would be considered; there is no formula. PC stated that each committee member would have one vote; GF believes that the SOS members' votes would carry the most weight, and AG agreed that the outside committee members do not appear to be imposing any agenda of their own.
There was concern about the length of the process. AG said that the process is really not too prolonged. The search started late. The choice to bring in a large number of candidates was made in response to faculty concerns that there were not enough outside candidates relative to the number of internal candidates. GF stated that the committee entertains the option of bringing back strong candidates for second interviews even while the first-interviews are continuing. AG added that this would be especially likely if there were a perceived risk of losing a strong candidate.
AG stressed that the committee as a whole is trying to be as responsive as possible to the concerns and input of the faculty. He encouraged that all faculty contact the committee with any feedback, concerns or suggestions.
IV. Budget Issues and Related Matters (Dean Stocum)
Dean Stocum (DS) reported on the budget. A full report was distributed to each Department Chair in the SOS, and the Dean encouraged faculty members to obtain a copy from their Chair for details.
Upon completing his report, DS was asked if he would be leaving the SOS financially solid. He replied that he did not anticipate a deficit. He was then asked if he would support the pending hires. DS replied that all of the candidates looked very strong and would likely generate grant revenues for the school.
RA adjourned the meeting at 2:22 p.m.
Submitted, P. Fastenau
March 26, 2004