Faculty Assembly
THE FACULTY ASSEMBLY
THE COLLEGE OF WILLIAM AND MARY IN VIRGINIA:
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF TUESDAY MAY 9, 2000
The meeting was called to order at 2:06 p.m. with 19 members present.
The minutes of the meeting of April 25, 2000 were approved as amended by John Oakley.
I. Administrative Reports
Provost Cell reported on the faculty research budget. She provided a brief historical overview of faculty research funding that showed fluctuating allocations for faculty research. She noted there was some decline in funds in the mid-'90s to provide support for faculty start-up costs. This decline has ended and faculty research funds have been built back up again.
The Provost reported that she gives the Faculty Research Committee a sum of money and tells the committee to distribute it between FRAs and SRGs as it sees fit. She noted that the number of FRAs has remained in the range of 28 to 31 per year.
Provost Cell stated that there is commitment to build up FRA funds. She has commissioned a study of faculty cohorts to determine forthcoming need for FRAs. She stated that she can not yet tell just how much she will be able to allocate to FRAs for next year. She hopes to increase allocations to deans for faculty leave replacements and to FRC to increase the number of FRA awards.
In response to the increased demand for FRAs, Provost Cell floated the idea of reducing the 80 percent funding of a two-semester leave to a lower figure, perhaps 75%. She asked for reactions to this possibility. Considerable support for the 80 percent figure was voiced by Assembly members. Will Hausman noted that the 80 percent FRA is an attractive recruiting device. The Provost said that she preferred to look at every other possibility first, but she also wants to protect the quality of the College's instructional program. She said that she would take the points the faculty raised very seriously.
Provost Cell also asked for advice on whether to continue giving FRC flexibility on how to divide resources between SRGs and FRAs. Alternatively, she could ask that the committee award a specific number of each type of grant. Comments from the floor seemed to favor flexibility over a fixed distribution of the various grants.
President Lutzer thanked the Provost for making substantial additions to the 1998-99 faculty research budget, bringing it almost back to the level of the early 1990s. But he added, and the Provost agreed, that the size of the faculty has grown substantially since the early 1990s so that restoring the faculty research budget to previous levels will not be enough.
II. Reports of Standing Committees
A. Academic Advisory Committee. No report
B. Committee on Committees. Chair Joe Scott distributed COC's report on its review of university-wide committees. Scott stated that COC surveyed the chairs of all 20 university-wide committees. Eleven surveys were returned to the committee. Based on these returns, five committees were selected for review during the 1999-2000 academic year. The COC report contains an analysis of four committees (Commencement Policy; Landscape, Energy and Environment; Library Policy; and University Development Advisory). Scott promised a fifth report (Transportation Advisory) will be forthcoming shortly.
Based on its committee review, COC put forth the following recommendations:
1. "It is crucial that the chairs and the membership of all committees
be established well in advance of the fall semester, and preferably in the spring
of that same year."
2. "The faculty and administration would be well served by having access
to a single website wherein all university-wide committees and their charges
are listed."
3. "Several faculty and administrators suggested that it would be valuable
to establish some simple method whereby committee activities or reports could
be passed along to new chairs."
Considerable discussion followed concerning the steps necessary to make committee appointments in a timely manner. In addition, Elmer Schaefer argued that the Transportation Advisory Committee should be consulted regarding efforts to improve the parking situation on campus, and David Lutzer noted that parking improvement ideas had been discussed with BPAC about one year ago. Don Baxter called for more effective communication with faculty around major capital initiatives. President Lutzer stated that the Executive Committee will need to be more activist in priming the faculty governance system.
C. Faculty Research Committee Report. (Circulated prior to the meeting).
Committee chair Wanda Wallace explained the annual work cycle of FRC. She noted that Provost Cell increased the FRC budget for 1999-2000, leading to an increased number of all types of faculty research grants (Faculty Research Assignment, Summer Research Grant, Minor Research Grant). Wallace stated the FRC membership believes there is an intense need for further research budget increases.
Discussion ensued over whether FRC or the Provost sets policy. Provost Cell stated her belief that FRC makes recommendations on policy to the Provost who sets policy. Lutzer pointed out the charge to the Faculty Research Committee that appears in the Assembly Constitution, assigning to FRC the duty of establishing procedures for the Faculty Research Program. The Provost commented that the line between "procedures" and "policies" is often somewhat gray.
President Lutzer noted that the Provost is hearing from the Executive Committee about the need for more FRAs and more funds to hire faculty leave replacements. The Provost agreed that both goals are desirable and added that the level of the faculty research budget will not be set until later this summer.
D. Executive Committee. President Lutzer announced that the Executive Committee will meet next week to review a draft of the 2010 report. Vice President/President-elect Bill O'Connell reminded continuing Assembly members of the retreat scheduled for August 24-25 at Upper Brandon. The ceremonial transfer of power took place when President Lutzer passed the purple key to the Board Room to President-elect O'Connell.
III. Old Business
Ad Hoc Committee on Financial Aid. Alan Meese gave a preliminary report on the work of the committee. A written report will be submitted to next year's Faculty Assembly. Meese reported that the College has no merit scholarships as such. A study of five "peer" institutions (Vanderbilt, Duke, Wake Forest, UVA, and Georgetown) revealed that all but Georgetown offer merit scholarships. Meese stated that some schools are redefining how they calculate need to make it easier to qualify for financial aid. He also noted that W&M has so far refused to negotiate financial aid offers to counter offers from competitor institutions.
Ad Hoc Committee on Faculty Development. John Oakley, speaking for his colleagues on the Ad Hoc Committee on Faculty Development, read a statement objecting to comments during the April 25 Assembly meeting suggesting the committee's report paid too little attention to teaching.
The meeting was adjourned at 3:56 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Roger Baldwin
Secretary
