September 2, 2014 Meeting of Executive Committee

1.      1:30-2:00pm – Mary Laskowski – Statement on Promotion and Tenure
 
2.      Approve Minutes from August 25
 
3.      Question Time
 
4.      Emeritus status for a faculty member
 
5.      Structuring around progression through rank (associate to full), follow-on from Tenured Faculty meeting
 
6.      5-year review experience – Cole

John Wilkin, chair; Kirstin Dougan, vice-chair, JoAnn Jacoby, secretary; Tim Cole, Lori Mestre, Bill Mischo, Lynne Rudasill, Sarah Williams; Visitor – Mary Laskowski

1.      1:30-2:00pm – Mary Laskowski – Statement on Promotion and Tenure
EC discussed the document with Mary. Mary will incorporate suggestions into the document and asked if anyone else on the committee had any more comments to send them to her. Mary will send the document back to EC for final approval before the faculty meeting.

2.      Approve Minutes from August 25
Minutes were approved with changes by a motion from Lori Mestre, seconded by Lynne Rudasill.

3.      Question Time
A personnel issue was discussed.

EC discussed an email exchange regarding the restructuring document.

4.      Emeritus status for a faculty member
This was approved by a motion from Lynne Rudasill, seconded by JoAnn Jacoby.

5.      Structuring around progression through rank (associate to full), follow-on from Tenured Faculty meeting
EC would like to see better structural support provided to associate professors going up for full. There are clear guidelines for assistant professors going to associate, but less clear guidelines for associate going to full.

John will bring this up in the full professor meeting on September 30 and ask for volunteers to help prepare a document for EC to look at.

6.      5-year review experience – Cole

John asked a representative from EC, AC and LSSC to do the 5-year reviews for this year. The reports were outstanding and useful. Tim Cole chaired the group, along with Mary Schlembach and Lisa Renee Kemplin.

Tim suggested that the review group be appointed earlier next year. The group looked at expectation documents, scheduled interviews with internal and external individuals, sent a short survey to gather feedback from the staff in the units involved, looked at personal annual reports and unit annual reports.

The group felt the survey could be better and that Jen Yu might be a good person to help with this for the next review. It’s also important that the unit heads cultivate relationships with the units on campus using their library, so there are sufficient people to contact for input. The group also felt that the Unit Head expectations should be updated every year or two to incorporate new goals as things change.