Faculty Assembly
Faculty Assembly Meeting Minutes
December 9, 2003
Members present: Nancy Gray, Ann Reed, Katherine Kulick, Clay Clemens, Will
Hausman, Larry Ventis, Deborah Bebout, Robert Orwoll, Christopher Abelt, Laurie
Sanderson, Roger Ries, Lan Cao, Ron Rosenberg, Liz Canuel, Robert Diaz, James
Beers, Wanda Wallace, Jonathan Arries, Alan Fuchs (Parliamentarian).
Members absent: Robert Archibald, William Stewart.
I. President Rosenberg called the meeting to order at 3:40 P.M. The minutes from the November 11 Faculty Assembly Meeting were approved without dissent.
II. Report of Administrative Officers. President Timothy Sullivan presented an overview of a proposed new plan for funding higher education in Virginia. In very brief overview, the plan presented proposes that the State Legislature give colleges and universities a five year budget projection of what level of funding the legislature intends to provide. The universities would then use the Cost of Education, consisting of the state legislature's own numbers for the level of funding needed for higher education, as an agreed on target. Then the universities, including the College of William and Mary, should be freed to try to make up the difference between the Cost of Education and the actual funding provided by the state in the five year projection, via tuition and fee increases. (e.g., the discrepancy for this academic year is 21 million dollars). Faculty Assembly members then posed a few questions. For example, Will Hausman asked about the role of private funding. President Sullivan made no prediction on how private funds would fare in the future, but noted that if the state were to reduce state funding by the amount that the College raised through private funds, this would quite problematic. Laurie Sanderson asked if there would be a cap on tuition? President Sullivan replied that we have to assume that tuition will be capped, but he has no specific information about the limit. Ron Rosenberg asked if there were anything that the Faculty Assembly could do to help. President Sullivan indicated that if the Faculty Assemblies within the state were united, this might exert some positive influence.
III. Committee Reports.
a. Ann Reed of the Faculty Affairs Committee reported on their deliberations
regarding the Burma Resolution brought forth at the last Faculty Assembly meeting
by Mark Fowler. The Committee met and discovered that they were uncomfortable
in going forward with the resolution for several reasons: (1) they felt insufficiently
informed to recommend it to the Board of Visitors. (2) They were uncomfortable
going forward without consultation with other faculty groups. (3) Some felt
that such a resolution would be inappropriate from a group of representatives
of the academic community. Generally, they believed that they needed more guidance
and discussion from the Faculty Assembly. Discussion ensued. Points raised included
a preference to resolve what the Faculty Assembly should do with political questions
(Wallace); a statement that from our constitution we can clearly consider this
issue (Reed); the possibility of holding open discussions of the issue within
the respective faculties (Gray); and the claim that there is basically no one
who does not reject the present Burmese government (Hausman). Summarizing briefly,
some thought it within our purview and that we could and should address the
issue in some positive way, and some were reluctant to engage this issue for
a variety of reasons.
i. Related motions were put forward by Clay Clemens and Will Hausman, which
when integrated read as follows: "I move that the resolution (presented
to the Faculty Assembly by Mark Fowler) be referred back to the Faculty Affairs
Committee of the Faculty Assembly for rewording of a resolution on this matter,
for consideration by the Faculty Assembly." The motion was seconded by
Jonathan Arries, and passed unanimously.
ii. In addition, President Rosenberg announced a goal of having results on the
initial portion of the Faculty Survey for presentation to the Faculty Assembly
in the January meeting.
IV. Non-Academic Leave Policy. Robert Diaz, representing COPAR, spoke with Provost Feiss about this issue. There is a potential problem with the question of whether our non-academic leave policy applies to specific term faculty, or to limits on the degree to which it might apply. Many specific term faculty have an extended interval, sometimes of years, during which they are in this role. It was agreed that COPAR would explore this issue further, and Ron Rosenberg suggested that they might consult further with the Provost on the matter.
V. Faculty Assembly Meeting Schedule. Since we had switched the Faculty Assembly meetings to the second Tuesday of the month during Fall semester, primarily to accommodate to schedule changes associated with hurricane Isabel, it was announced and agreed on that we will switch back to a regular meeting time for Spring semester of the fourth Tuesday of each month. (January 27th, February 24th, March 23rd , and April 27th). Due to the end of the semester, we may meet on the second Tuesday in May (May 11th).
The meeting was adjourned at 5:09 P.M.
Respectfully submitted by Larry Ventis, Secretary.
