Topic

Discussion

Action or Resolution

Call to Order

Kathie Wilcox called the meeting to order at 3:45pm. 

1. Order of Business

1.  Because of the presence of guests available to discuss New Business items, New Business was conducted out of order from the published agenda.

New Business

Ed Miller

2.  Proposal for revision of General Education Committee as a Standing Committee of the Faculty Senate

2.a. Presented for consideration the creation of the General Education Committee as a standing committee of the Faculty Senate. Currently the Gen Ed Committee is a subcommittee of the Curriculum Committee.

2. b. Rationale: The Gen Ed Committee is charged with overseeing the general education core at LCSC.  The responsibility for development of the Gen Ed core is the responsibility of all faculty, it is important that the committee be an advocate for the faculty and ensure that general education meets the needs of students and the institution.

2. c. The proposed term for committee members is five years in order to insure continuity.

2. d. Also discussed were possible procedures for the interface between the Curriculum Committee and the General Education Committee. 

2.e.  The representation of constituencies and membership of the proposed committee was discussed. 

2. The Administrative Procedures Committee requests that the following committees meet to discuss the proposal and how to proceed with the recommendations and philosophy of the General Education Committee:

General Education

Curriculum

Faculty Affairs

Specific considerations include:

• Chair rotation
• The eligibility of  Division Chairs to sit on the committee. 

These committees should report the findings of their individual committees at the next meeting of the APC with the final report to the Faculty Association for vote.

Old Business

3. Institutional Review Board

3.a..  The problem with the application form has been resolved.

3.b.   The Faculty Handbook now reflects the updated information and the new form.

3.  There will be a “Brown Bag “ lunch on December 3^rd to discuss IRB procedures.

4.  Criteria for Advancement in Rank

Policy # 2.107

Dr. Fernandez

4.a.  It is suggested that the title be changed from “Advancement in Rank” to “Criteria for Promotion” to better reflect the intent of the policy.  The policy for the academic component of the college has been completed.

• Discussion ensued regarding the possibility for use of a step system for advancement within a ranking
• Dr. Fernandez indicated he does not anticipate this occurring within the near future

4.b.  The criteria for promotion within the Technical Divisions need completion.

4.c.  This policy will be taken forward as a whole once that step is complete.

4.d.  Dr Fernandez clarified various points about the importance for standardized expectations/percentages to be set within Divisions to assist faculty in the promotion/tenure process.  Debbie Goodwin pointed out that having set criteria would be helpful, having been a part of the SPTRC last year.

4.  The committee has no difficulty with the intent of the policy at this time, though approval of it will be deferred until the revised technical portion can be approved at the same time.

In the meanwhile:

4.a.1  Each Division needs to define its criteria for promotion.

4.a.2  Each Division needs to define the standards by which a candidate for promotion will be judged against these criteria.

4.a.3.  The candidate’s job description should define the percentage each criterion should use based on the candidate’s job description.

4.a.4.  For Promotion and Tenure, the candidate’s personal statement should reflect:  “I have met this criteria because…” based on the individual’s Division criteria.

New Business

5.  Periodic Performance Review  #2.113

Dr. Pharr

5.  The committee was asked to go back to Division meetings and explore a change to the policy for Periodic Performance Review.

Suggested changes:

• Add annual evaluations as a part of the performance review for tenured faculty
• Delete SRI’s as needed in the faculty packet presented for review.  This is suggested because the enclusion of performance reviews should include a summary of SRI scores.

Changes will have to be in accordance with SBOE requirements

Changes will go to the Faculty Association for approval once discussed here

5.  Members are asked to take this recommendation back to their Divisions.

Old Business

6.  Evaluation of Division Chairs

6.  The question was raised whether any further action was needed on this topic

6.a.  Kathie will do follow up with Chet Herbst on this matter.

6.b.  Members are encouraged to take this evaluation process back to their Divisions for use.

7.  Search and Hiring Policies

Harold Crook

7.a. As noted last month, this is a Presidential Guidance Initiative.  This committee’s involvement comes at the invitation of Lori Gaskill via an email to Kathie Wilcox.

7.b.  This committee has met.  Polices are being worked on with a focus on a process for internal candidates.  There is nothing specific to report at this time.

7.  No action

8.  Faculty Association Meeting

8.  There will be a meeting of the Faculty Association Friday December 7, 2004 at 3:00 pm in the WCC

6. Adjournment

6.  The meeting was adjourned at 5:15 pm