March 9, 2020 Meeting of Executive Committee

Time and Location of Meeting

March 9, 20201:30 pm - 3:00 pm 428 Main Library

Agenda Details




March 9, 2020


428 Library


  1. Approve minutes – March 2
  2. Question Time
  3. AUL Updates (2-2:30pm)
  4. Peer Mentoring Committees for Full Professors
  5. Position Announcements


Minutes Details




March 9, 2020 

1:30-3:00 pm428 Library 


Present:  John Wilkin, Chair; David Ward, Vice-Chair; Lynne Rudasill, Secretary & Recorder; Paula Carns; William Maher; Bill Mischo; Mara Thacker; Lynne Thomas 


Guests:  Cherie’ Weible, Heidi Imker 


  1. The Minutes of March 2 were approved with minor edits upon the motion of Bill Maher with a second by Mara Thacker. 



  1. Question Time 


The Dean indicated that the budget meeting with the Provost’s Office went very well.  He had forwarded a lengthy summary of the meeting to the Executive Committee for information. 


A question was asked about the nature of the comments related to learning analytics.  We are interested in hearing about the campus directions in this area.  The campus appears to be very interested in performance metrics – where we are succeeding and what is needed to help us move forward.  They are also interested in understanding online use of library resources and the impact of our instructional programs.  We have already been thinking about these things and looking at benchmarks. It was noted that this is a place where we must protect the privacy of our users.  Both can be done and Bill Mischo’s research in log analysis is an example of how it can be accomplished.  It was also noted that group data is not as helpful in the exploration of learning analytics and we will need to keep the privacy of the individual in mind as we explore different, less inferential, measures of success. 


The Dean is moving ahead to develop the search to fill position for Assistant Dean for Finance and Human Resources.  A position description will be forthcoming from the Dean for discussion at the next EC meeting.  The Dean’s intent is to focus more on human resources with an individual who has a solid background in finance. 


  1. AUL Updates (2-2:30pm) 


Chris Prom and Tom Teper were unable to attend and their reports were postponed to a future meeting. 



Heidi Imker 


Pre-Tenure Track Working Group 

Heidi reported that the working group is actually looking at several potential structures including providing junior faculty with more training opportunities and other models of pre-tenure and tenure track support.  Currently the group is looking at what type of support might be needed and listing the opportunities that already exist.  After a brief discussion the Executive Committee agreed that the charge to the working group should have the flexibility to look at other models and present a variety of these at a faculty meeting for discussion, hopefully in April. 


Room 220 Renovation 

The really good news is the availability of the type of moveable rooms deemed ideal for the space have been found and based on the design there would be room for four of these collaboration spaces.  Heidi has seen them in person and in addition to having good ventilation they have almost no entrance lip, which facilitates entry access. 



RDS is now down one person again.  The Digital Publishing Specialist position has, however, been filled. 



Cherie’ Weible 


Room 200 Flooring 

The tiles are being laid in Room 200 and the north part of the room should be done soon with the entire floor being done by the end of May.  Facilities will have to focus on the air handler in the basement over spring break which will slow completion of the work down a bit. 


ILS Transition 

Significant work is ongoing with the transition to ALMA and timelines are falling into place. 


Academic Review Question 

The Dean indicated that at the end of his budget meeting there was a discussion of the academic program review at the college and department level that generally takes place every five years through the Provost’s Office.  The Library has not been part of the process and the Dean was asked if this would be feasible.  Discussion of the prospect brought out a variety of issues that might need to be discussed since this would be a fairly significant undertaking.   Issues included determining the best referees for the process, whether this would provide a defined benefit for the Library, and when this might best take place.  It was generally agreed that the University Library would benefit from the process, especially since it is a college within the University structure and should be willing to be reviewed as such.  However, with the looming implementation of ALMA and the work on the building project it was suggested that this process be explored for implementation in a couple of years, as opposed to right away.  It is assumed that this will come up in future conversations between the Dean and the Provost, and the Dean will share our wishes to participate in a review process when the two major projects have moved forward a bit more. 


Continuity of Instruction 

The closure of some campuses due to the COVID-19 virus has caused the University and, especially, the University Library to consider issues relating to continuity of service should the campus have to shut down or go to online instruction only as some others have done.  A group has been tasked to formulate a plan which articulates continuity of services if instruction is canceled or otherwise affected by the illness.  They are considering the issues that are involved in such an undertaking and provide some guidance on how this might be dealt with, not only to provide support for our users, but also to provide much needed support to our staff.  (The group includes Heather Murphy, Chris Prom, Cherie’ Weible, Tim Newman and Bill Mischo.) 


  1. Peer Mentoring Committees for Full Professors 

The Executive Committee will ask that in addition to the document that is available on the group drive, a document be uploaded to the website that lists not only the untenured peer review committee members, but also the list of tenured faculty working toward full professor and their peer mentoring committees.  This will help us get a better idea of who is available to nominate when these requests come forward. 


  1. Position Announcements – Salary Posting and Building Project Notice 

The Executive Committee requests that base salary numbers be listed in position announcements in the future.  (Currently these numbers are $55,000 for Academic Professionals, $58,000 for Visiting Faculty and $60,000 for Tenure Track Assistant Professors.)  This is both part of “truth in advertising” and an opportunity to underline the livable wage we provide as an attractive part of our employment.  The Dean will follow up with some salary compression issues this might cause. Search committees should be free to mention these base salaries in their interactions with candidates. 



The Executive Committee has also requested that Tom Teper work with Skye to create a sentence related to the possible changes brought about by the building project which can be added to job announcements in the future.   

Also noted were updates on a couple of internal position announcements and the fact that one individual in IT was randomly selected for an audit