FAEC Minutes November 1, 2017

Faculty Assembly Executive Council (FAEC) Meeting Minutes November 1 2017 ASB 008 Room 10:30am to 12:30am

Attendees:​ Christina Connor, Cristina Perez, Roark Atkinson, Renata Gangemi, Kathryn Zeno, Tae Kwak, Gladys Torres-Baumgarten, Kim Lorber

Excused: Eva Ogens

Secretary:​ Hugh Sheehy

Guests:​ Peter Mercer

Minutes of 10/25 Approved

Various committee members expressed that many faculty members in their respective Units remain uneasy about the lack of clarity regarding the manner in which the Search Committee for the next Provost was put together; for instance, CA Dean was asked to select faculty while others were not.  Four representatives (Faculty Assembly, AFT, Library Unit, and Dean’s Council) have conspicuously been dropped in the 2017 Search Committee.  For reference:

2003 Provost Search Committee (from Mercer’s 2003 email announcement):

Chair Professor Donna Crawley

AIS representative Professor Steve Rice

Business Professor Thierry-Rakotobe- Joel

CA Professor Ruma Sen

SSHS Professor Alex Urbiel

TAS Professor Eric Karlin

Library Ms. Liz Siecke

Trustees Mr. Tim Schroeder

Deans Dean Jennefer Mazza

Faculty Assembly Professor Kay Fowler

AFT Professor Eddie Saiff

Professional staff Mr.Richard Morales-Wright

SGA representative yet to be named

Administration Dr. Dorothy Echols-Tobe

2017 Provost Search Committee (from Mercer’s Oct. 10, 2017 email):

HGS, Chair Yvette Kisor, Professor

CA Rep Ben Neill, Associate Professor

TAS Rep Cristina Perez, Assistant Professor

Erin Augis,  Professor SSHS Rep

ASB Rep Thiery Rakotobe-Joel, Associate Professor

HGS Rep Lisa Cassidy, Associate Professor

Student Rep Stephen Geerlof

VP,  EMSA, Cabinet Rep Christopher Romano

Position Control, Staff Rep Kathy Stathis

Trustee Vin Colman

Chief of Staff and Board Liaison, Administrative Facilitator (non-voting)
Brittany Goldstein

Committee members discussed plans for Faculty Forum.

Committee members discussed the composition of FAEC next semester in the interest of creating some continuity in the next FAEC and to establish a regular staggering of committee members’ departure from the committee. The committee will seek clarity on the issue of term limits before determining how best to do this.

President’s Visit: a committee member asked about the construction of the Provost’s Search Committee twelve years ago versus this year; the President answered that the aim this time around was to simplify the issue around clarifying that this committee is a search, not a selection committee, and “not constituency-based”; the President stated he wanted to create a diversity of faculty and staff perspectives that represent the Schools of the College without advocating for the interests of individual Schools. The President stated that his sense is that the Search Committee’s most strongly recommended candidates would be clear. A committee member stated that many FAEC members have been reporting concern coming out of their Units about the process of creating the Search Committee and, by extension, the search for a new Provost; Mercer responded that he hopes that any concerned faculty will seek out candidates at appropriate fora and express their concerns directly. A committee member stated that an unclear signal seems to have been sent out, that “the optics” of this process are not great, in that certain bodies (Deans, AFT, Library and FA reps.) are not represented; Mercer replied that he deliberately chose to make the Search Committee unrepresentative for the reasons outlined above. It was asked whether there couldn’t be more clarity about this process; Mercer replied that the process was clear but unpopular because of its difference. A committee member expressed the view the desire of many faculty members seems to be that this process seem more in keeping with the spirit of shared governance than they consider it to be currently. A committee member asked about the lack of representation by AFT; Mercer stated that if AFT had a representative, other dedicated organizations and bodies might want one; a committee member argued that AFT reps faculty and that the College is a “union shop” and that thus AFT should be represented on the Search Committee; Mercer replied that there are members of AFT on the current Search Committee and that he feels adding a designated AFT rep to the Search Committee “is not warranted at this time”. A committee member asked how the President envisions the current process yielding the kind of candidate the College needs; Mercer replied that the diversity of the Search Committee and the outside search firm hired is intended to create a more thorough vetting of candidates and College needs. Mercer stated that he anticipates that the Search Committee will be looking at the job description for the next Provost; he stated that he believes the next Provost will need to think about new revenue streams for the College such as in Continuing Education and Executive Education. He stated that while the College has had success in managing money in recent years, he believes the College must think about a future in which revenues outside of traditional sources such as Graduate School tuition and the State. There was some discussion of the President’s expectations regarding the library presentation at Faculty Assembly; he believes a potential swing space has been identified. A committee member inquired about the timeline for the College’s announcement of how many promotions will be available this Academic Year and why it could not be made at the beginning of each Fall semester; Mercer anticipates an announcement will be made next week and explained that the Administration needs a certain amount of time to take into consideration future faculty numbers College-wide; he stated that he will make an effort to make the number of promotions available earlier in future semesters.

Categories: Uncategorized