Attending: R. Allen (Chair), A. Barth (Geology), D. Malik (Chemistry), J. Kuczkowski (Dean’s Office), J. Luke (Mathematical Sciences), P. Fastenau (Psychology), D. Stocum (Dean’s Office), D. Rao (Physics), D. Crowell (Biology), K. Johnson (Secretary)
1. The proposed November 7 Steering Committee meeting will be rescheduled to
November 14 (to accommodate Unit Committee meeting on 11/7). Meeting dates for
the remainder of the semester are: October 10, November 14, and December 5,
10 AM in SL306C.
2 . Chancellor Bantz can meet with the Science Faculty Assembly on October 3rd
at 10 AM. LD 010 is available from 10-11. Rosemarie Temple will be asked to
investigate availability of large auditoriums at that time. D. Malik suggested
inviting lecturers as well. R. Allen asked people to “talk this up”
with their colleagues to ensure that attendance is good. The format will be
a 30-minute presentation followed by 30 minutes of questions and answers. Dean
Plater may also attend this meeting. Some issues suggested by Steering Committee
members (to potentially be raised as questions by committee members during the
Q/A session):
- Space
- Parity of funding (i.e., funding per student credit hour)
- Bantz’s vision for the future of IUPUI within the scope of the vision
for Indiana University being developed by President Herbert
- Coping with declining revenues
- Distribution of assessments and appropriations across schools
- Ensuring parity in terms of research/scholarship missions across campuses
within IU system
- Centralization scheme championed by Brand (e.g., more structure situated in
Bloomington, and associated tax increases)
- Decomposition of IUPUI (crediting of other schools/campuses with degrees granted);
recognition of IUPUI as a separate (rather than “merged”) campus.
3. Budget Update:
- We now need to pay for the Dean Search, which is an unanticipated expense:
75 – 100K.
- Chemistry enrollments have skyrocketed: 30K has been used to pay for additional
section openings
- GCND student enrollments have remained high. Biology has supported this program
in terms of advising expenses, and costs associated with financial aid. The
School of Science is now going to support this program.
- Additional funding has been provided to departments since June.
- We might have approximately 90K in this fund. D. Stocum proposes that we hold
this in reserve at this time.
4. Reconsideration of Administrative Review Procedure: Issues surrounding proposed
changes to administrative review processes were reviewed. R. Allen suggested
the formation of a subcommittee to work out the details of these
proposed changes. D. Stocum advocated altering the review process to be product-oriented,
or focused on functions at the school (or department) level, and whether those
functions/products are being realized. The removal of the “personal element”
of the review process should help to make the administrative review process
more productive. The timing of the review cycle might be adapted from that used
for faculty (3 and 5 year reviews). Discussion ensued concerning the merits
of a brief annual (and perhaps quantitative) review, as well as possible alternative
mechanisms (e.g., end-of-year focus groups centered on departmental strategic
planning). R. Allen requested that all committee members go back and solicit
feedback from their colleagues regarding this issue. There was agreement that
Lecturers SHOULD participate in administrative reviews, and we will move ahead
this year on adding an amendment to the bylaws to enable this.
5. Proposed changes to P&T guidelines: The subcommittee drafted changes
to the P&T guidelines. This will need to be discussed at faculty assembly
(or a special town meeting) and then voted on (by mail) in the spring.
6. “Memorandum of Understanding – Assuring Rights of Use of Instructional Materials” This document (which has been circulated among all faculty) had been briefly discussed at the May, 2003 meeting. If a faculty member develops material (e.g., for online course), the question of, “who possesses the rights to these materials, should the faculty member who developed them leave the institution?” may become pressing. Does the university retain the rights to use these resources in the future? D. Stocum explained that this is not a policy, but just a statement of rights concerning intellectual property. K. Crews will be invited to attend a future steering committee meeting to explain this statement to us. D. Stocum argued that the purpose of the document is to create a collegial atmosphere in which negotiations concerning intellectual property rights can occur readily. The Technology Committee is also being asked for input on this issue, and will also (independently) invite K. Crews to attend their meeting.
7 . Dean Search: The search committee has been formed and an external search
company will likely be hired to coordinate the search activities. There were
approximately 7 faculty members from the School of Science (out of a total of
15
members put forth on a list to Dean Plater). D. Stocum has agreed meet with
candidates as they are identified through the search process in order to serve
as an information conduit (he will not in any way be engaged in the final
selection/recommendation process).
Respectfully submitted, 9/12/03
K. Johnson, Secretary