April 22cond , 2005
Unfortunately, I missed the first ten minutes of this "chat". I understand though that the Provost discussed that the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees had a presentation by the Faculty Liaison to the Board of Trustees and that this Board committee is solidly in support of the teaching load reduction plan. The provost sees the college's faculty as an invaluable resource that must stay connected with their fields in order to make them more productive. He feels that that the view that "the more you teach the better you teach" to be ludicrous. The Provost further feels that some faculty responsibilities can be turned over to academic staff. He also wants to look at the issues of workload and productivity in a holistic manner.
This "chat" (having about 25 people present) noted that the 2010 implementation team has met several times. Steve gave credit to Alicia Berg for her co-operation in looking into space issues throughout the college. Steve also noted that the college's Academic Affairs committee will soon begin seriously looking at the viability of a "common schedule" for all students.
Other announcements included the establishment of our IRB, the upcoming [Fall 2005] faculty center on the 8 th floor of the 600 Michigan Building, a visit by the Provost to London in early June to hopefully develop new articulation initiatives with the University of East London and the University of the Arts(?) and the projected start of an R/D center which will hopefully allow faculty members to develop new ideas.
The Provost also noted that the tenure process will be reviewed in an effort to make it more productive and time efficient [TENURE ITSELF WILL NOT BE CHANGED!]. He noted that there are some faculty throughout the institution who serve on far too many tenure committees. He wants the best results from the tenure process without further increasing the faculty burden. To this end, a committee, of maybe ten people, will be formed composed of members of the Board of Trustees, department chairs and faculty recommended by CCFO leadership. This review process will have as its objectives strengthening the institution while also reducing faculty workload. This process may even look at triggered tenure review.
I asked if the Provost would consider a new system for merit raises at the college. He indicated that he would if it was "linked" with the tenure standards and there was wide faculty input into this idea.
Assessment came up as a topic. The Provost stated that recent college emphasis on this topic is not only due to the upcoming NCA visit but is necessary as a learning process for the institution.
Notes submitted by