Topic

Discussion

Action or Resolution

Call to Order and Introductions

Kathie Wilcox called the meeting to order at 1:05pm.  Introductions were made; guests were acknowledged

Designation of Secretary

Kathie asked for a member to take meeting minutes and distribute online via Lynne Bidwell.

Marilyn Heckendorn volunteered to keep the minutes.

Meeting time

Fridays were suggested as the best day though the hour will be late.  Kathie stated that meetings would probably be monthly.

The first Friday of each month was determined to be the designated meeting time.  Meetings will begin at 3:45 pm.

Old Business

1.  Revised policies in Spring 2004

1. The policy, Advancement in Rank, was reviewed with the committee members.  This policy was approved by the Senate in the Spring.  Members were reminded that this policy will be effective next academic year, pending approval by administration and development of promotion criteria by divisions.  The old policy is still in effect.

1.  No action

New Business

1.  Policies 2.106 and 2.107 : Criteria for Advancement in Rank/ Promotion

1.a This committee has been asked by the Provost to examine these policies for wording changes which are more consistent to the practice of advancement.  Example given was:  “Lecturers”’ are described in the policy though that status no longer exists at LCSC.

1.b.  Discussion ensued about the issue of renaming the policy to be “Criteria for Promotion” which would be consistent with our current promotion practices.  Committee members discussed the fact that reward and salary improvements are given only with promotion and tenure.  After accomplishment of those advancements, salary increases are not built in to our system. The question was raised whether the group should examine advancements within a rank as a possibility.  In the past the practice of giving a “longevity bump” helped to reward faculty who remained at the college for an extended period of years, but that has not been practiced for many years.

1. a. and b.  Action was tabled until next meeting.  The Provost will be invited to attend the next meeting to further explain his wishes for rewording.

2.  Division policies for promotion criteria

2.  The individual Divisions on campus are to be developing criteria for promotion.  These criteria will be used next year.  The status of the progress of these revisions varies among the Divisions at present.

2. The chair asked committee members to follow-up with Division Chairs so that they proceed with the development of these criteria.

3.  Policy for Evaluation of Division Chairs

3. a.  Chet Herbst presented the trial process (ERA) used last year for surveying employees for feedback on the performance of their supervisors.  The trial was piloted at the Chair level in several Divisions, such as Nursing and Health Sciences, BTS, Social Sciences.  Faculty Affairs has endorsed this process.  It came about as part of the Strategic Planning Process.

b.  The process for the survey to take place was reviewed.  Its use needs to be agreed upon by the Division and Chair.  Chet is contacted and then initiates the online survey availability to the subordinates.  One-time submission is assured by checking off the employee’s name when the form is submitted, but employees are instructed not to include their names on the form in order to preserve anonymity.  Results are given as raw information to the person being evaluated as well as the supervisor of that person.   The plan is to automate this process by Spring 2005.

c.  Discussion ensued about the way the data is collected and presented.  It was suggested that anonymity will be preserved only when the process is able to be done On Line like SRIs, and that aggregation of all the responses under each section would also better ensure the anonymity of the evaluator.

d.  Chet asked for guidance from the group for the direction this survey process should take for the upcoming year.

3.d.  It will be recommended that Senators take this process back to their Divisions for discussion.  Each Division will be urged to use this means of obtaining feedback from the immediate subordinate employees during the evaluation process.  It was noted that the timing of this for each Division will vary.

4.  Search and Hiring Policy

4. a.  Diane Johnson presented the status of the formation of a group for the purpose of standardizing hiring practices across the college for faculty and professional staff.

b.  This is a Presidential Guidance Initiative.  This committee’s involvement comes at the invitation of Lori Gaskill via an email to Kathie Wilcox.

c.  Reasons for addressing this policy were discussed, including potential liability due to inconsistent practices and the current variability across campus.

4.c.  Harold volunteered to represent this committee on the larger ad hoc committee to assist in determining a policy which would apply across campus for hiring practices.

5. IRB Application Form

5.a.  This item has been resolved

6. Adjournment

6.  The meeting was adjourned at 14:35.