Faculty Assembly
THE FACULTY ASSEMBLY
THE COLLEGE OF WILLIAM AND MARY IN VIRGINIA:
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF TUESDAY SEPTEMBER 22, 1998
The meeting was called to order at 3:35 p.m. with the following members absent: Mark Raphael, Marc Sher, Hector Guerrero, William Hawthorne, all VIMS representatives.
Assembly President George Bass announced that hard copies of agenda and minutes would be available only upon request; otherwise, such documents would be distributed electronically via the Faculty Assembly listserver and the Faculty Digest, and would be po sted (when approved) on the Faculty Assembly Web Page.
I. Administrative Reports.
A. Provost Gillian Cell reported on two issues: the status of the revised disability leave and the budget amendments sent to Richmond.
1. Disability Leave. The Provost announced that the revised draft had been distributed to the Deans of the Schools, and that, pending their approval, copies of the draft would be distributed to Assembly members, to the various faculties, and to the women's caucus for discussion and comment before coming to the Faculty Assembly for approval. In essence, the new policy grants full-time faculty 120 days of disability leave, which may be used for short-term disability, for care of a disabled family member, or for care of an infant under one year or a newly-adopted child under seven years.
In response to questions, the Provost noted that this policy would have no impact on the regular long-term disability policy; that this policy did not specify "work days" or "calendar days," but sought to minimize strain on academic resources; and that th is policy provided no additional resources for departments to cover members on leave.
2. Budget amendments. The Provost reported that the College was allowed to forward amendments to the biennial budget approved by the legislature in the Spring of 1998, and that the Governor provided categories for such amendments: emergencie s, mandates, prior commitments and critical needs, reorganization and changes in delivery systems, technical adjustments, Y2K compliance, and capital projects. The College submitted requests for funding for operating support for the library storage facil ity and for the Peninsula Center; for institutional operating support for facilities maintenance, library materials, and non-personnel services; for replacement of computing systems and for materials processing research; for a technical amendment dealing with faculty salaries; for Y2K compliance; and for the planning of the renovation and expansion of Milling ton Hall and the replacement of underground utilities on campus. However, Richmond has asked for additional information on only four: library storage, faculty salaries, Y2K, and underground utilities.
In response to questions, the Provost explained that the Board of Visitors had voted to treat Millington separately from the rest of the budget amendments, since it did not fall strictly under the Governor's list of categories; however, she no ted, they had approved President Sullivan's right to take the request for funds for Millington to legislators. She said that she could not explain putative discrepancies about the amount of funding lost to higher education during the Wilder administratio n because she did not understand how the Department of Planning and Budget was calculating its figures and had not been at the meeting. She said that, if the Assembly desired, she would invite Sam Jones to explain the discrepancy at a subsequent Assembly meeting. Finally, she reported that the College has answered the Title IX complaint against us, showing that we are in compliance.
B. Dennis Aebersold, Associate Provost for Information Technology, reported on the College's response to the Year 2000 (Y2K) problem. He explained that the problem extended beyond mainframe systems to PC's, hardware and software, networks, voi ce systems, and embedded chips. He outlined the College's procedures to fix those things under our control: certain mainframe systems have been fixed or are being fixed, and Information Technology has created a separate office to identify all systems that we operate or are involved in that could fail, and then to develop contingency plans. He noted that the difficulties for the College will come from those things we don' t control--e.g., from agencies with whom we contract--and that we should be prepared for power outages and other interruptions in service. Finally, he pointed out that the College is already off the high-risk list and that our plan had been approved by the CDCI. In response to questions, the Associate Provost said that his office was in the process of identifying systems critical to the university, and that trained IT staff would be contacting departments to determine which of their systems were critic al and in danger. He remarked that IT was identifying alternate sources of funding should Richmond not provide enough to cover the College's needs; and he said that meetings of IT staff around campus should ensure that sufficient staff were dedicated to the needs of the various schools.
C. Karen Cottrell, Associate Provost for Enrollment, reported on the Task Force on Admissions, following up her report to the Assembly last Spring. She first announced that this year's freshman class reversed some downward trends: applications were generally up, we enrolled more Monroe Scholars than ever before (171), and we continued to attract valedictorians, salutatorians, and students in the top 10% of their graduating class. Following that good news, however, she discussed the "hot issues" for the Task Force: our cost is high enough that it no longer serves as a recruiting tool, and students' unmet financial need remains too high; and applications from and enrollments of African-American students have both declined significantly, in what the Associate Provost called an "indictment of the institution." Finally, she reported that the Task Force is continuing the work of the 96-97 Task Force (she offered to email that committee's report to any Assembly member who requested it from her at krcott@facstaff.wm.edu). A number of the 96-97 recommendations are being implemented: the College's visibility is higher, communication is better, and some general downturns have been reversed. The current Task Force will continue to work from those recommendations, polling students who don't enroll here to determine why they don't, creating focus groups to identify problems at the College that might discourage enrollment or application, a nd generally working to make visits of prospective students more effective by making the campus more accessible.
In response to questions, the Associate Provost noted that minority applications are not down at other state schools-including schools with whom we compete for students--and in fact have dramatically increased. She agreed to one member's requ est that the profile of entering students be posted on the Web.
II. Standing Committee Reports
A. Executive Committee. After announcing that Alan Fuchs has agreed to serve as Parliamentarian, and expressing the Assembly's continuing gratitude, President George Bass reported that the Executive Committee discussed on an internal issue-co mmunication between the Assembly and its constituent committees-and an external one-the Faculty Senate of Virginia's desire that we lobby on behalf of higher education. Regarding the internal issue: the Executive Committee plans to ask certain influenti al committees to report to the Assembly on an annual basis; it will also discuss the advisability of appointing Assembly members to certain committees in order to improve communication. Regarding the external one: the Executive Committee will explore t he advisability of lobbying legislators this Fall on key issues facing higher education, including increased financial aid for students, more stable funding for institutions, the value of general education requirements, and the contributions of faculty to the Commonwealth. Finally, President Bass reminded Assembly members that the Executive Committee meets two weeks before regularly scheduled Faculty Assembly meetings, and encouraged members to contact the Executive committee with their concerns.
B. Liaison Committee. Assembly Vice-president David Lutzer noted that, at the September meeting of the Board of Visitors, Professors Paul Heideman and Teresa Longo had reported on their experiences with the College's Teaching Enhancement Proje ct, a report deemed successful by both BOV members and the Provost.
C. Committee on Committees. COC Chair opened his report with a general statement of concern about certain inconsistencies between what the Committee has been doing for the past few years vs. what the committee is constitutionally charged to d o, most specifically in regard to recommending (as opposed to simply approving) appointments to some University-wide committees. The Parliamentarian pointed out that the Assembly By-Laws had been explicitly amended to provide the Assembly the opportunity to recommend names, especially for search committees for President, Provost, and other important university-wide positions. After some discussion, Robert Fulmer moved to approve the COC report, which included recommendations for appointments for the fol lowing university-wide committees:
The Selection Committee, Teaching Chairs
The Committee for Faculty Awards [note: this is the committee to select nominees
for the Outstanding Faculty Awards sponsored annually by SCHEV]
Concerts
Faculty Hearing
Faculty Compensation Board
Faculty Research
Honorary Degrees Advisory
Information Technology Advisory
Landscape, Environment Energy [sic]
Personnel Policy
Procedural Review
Publications council
Transportation Advisory
University Development Advisory
The Chair of the Arts & Sciences Faculty Affairs Committee, David Dessler, pointed out that the number of appointees to the Faculty Research committee was not consistent with the number of vacancies, and moved to exclude that committee from the COC report . His motion was seconded. Fulmer's amended motion was then seconded, and passed unanimously.
D. Academic Advisory Committee. AAC Chair Barbara Watkinson reported that the committee would bring to the October meeting the latest iteration of the Policy on Joint Appointments for approval by the Assembly. She noted that her committee ha d decided not to accept the recommendations offered by David Lutzer at the May 1998 Assembly meeting. In response to questions, she replied that the Arts & Sciences Dean's Advisory Committee had discussed this policy, as had the Arts & Sciences Faculty, before that policy came to Faculty Assembly. Echoing Dafashy's concerns about COC, Watkinson alerted the Assembly that AAC was also reviewing its charge, and would come to the November Assembly meeting with a clarification of its purpose or a recommendat ion for its own dismemberment.
Back to C. Committee on Committees, revisited. President Bass reminded the Assembled that we had not yet approved the constitution of the Search Committee for the Director of the Reves Center, the constitution of which had generated some of the confusion in the COC but whose membership was not included in the COC report. There was some discussion about whether the Reves Search Committee had been constituted according to the guidelines established in the Faculty By-laws. A motion was made t o approve the committee, and seconded. However, following an objection that the Assembly should neither approve or disapprove of a committee that had already met and that had been appointed amid some confusion and controversy about the role of the COC an d the Assembly in selecting its members, the initial motion and second were withdrawn. It was decided that the Assembly would revisit the duties of the COC at the October meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Colleen Kennedy
Secretary
