���Ҵ�ý�ƽ������

The Arts and Sciences Council, October 15, 2015, 3:30-5:00, ECON 13

Meeting Minutes

Representatives present: Sabahat Adil, ALC; Julio Baena, SPAN; Daniel Barth, PSYC; Paul Beale, PHYS; Giulia Bernardini, HUMN; Cathy Comstock, RAPS; Kim Dickey, AAH; Vanja Dukic, APPM; Erica Ellingson, APS; Robert Ferry, HIST; Rebecca Flowers, GEOL; Holly Gayley, RLST; Patrick Greaney, GSLL; Gerardo Gutierrez, ANTH; Weiqing Han, ATOC; Najeeb Jan, GEOG; Leslie Irvine, SOCY; Ruth Heisler, IPHY; Mans Hulden, LING; Moonhawk Kim, PSCI; E. Christian Kopff, HNRS; Angelica Lawson, ETHN; Rolf Norgaard, PWR; Rob Rupert, PHIL; Neeraja Sadagopan, SLHS; Kelly Sears, FILM; Ted Stark, THDN; David Stock, EBIO; Paul Youngquist, ENGL

Representatives not present: Michela Ardizzoni, FRIT; Andrew Cain, CLAS; David Jonas, CHEM; Daniel Kaffine, ECON; Rob Tubbs, MATH; Ding Xue, MCDB

Also in attendance: Steve Leigh; Janice Jeffryes; Cora Randall, ATOC; Ann Schmiesing, GSLL

Robert Rupert called the meeting to order at 3:35 PM.

Dean’s Report, Steven Leigh

The Gamow lecture with Jane Goodall was a huge success; tickets were in such demand that it moved from Macky to the Coors Event Center.

The Budget Committee and the Dean’s Office continue to work on the new budget model. It is activity based, not historical so colleges will get funds based on the number of students they serve. This has been better for Arts and Sciences with 2.1 million more funding this year. As the funds won’t be constant careful consideration to their use is appropriate. A representative suggested using the funds for graduate student offers.

Chair’s Report, Rob Rupert

Professor Rupert asked the ASC representatives to consider faculty titles; there will be a meeting on November 12 that will possibly suggest new titles for non-tenure track faculty whose primary responsibility is teaching. More information will follow.

The Planning Committee is considering faculty awards and the possibility of initiating new, “themed” awards (e.g., Graduate Mentor). The representatives were encouraged to send any ideas to the chair of the Planning Committee, Ding Xue.

Bylaws Discussion and Vote

Last week a draft of proposed changes to the ASC bylaws prepared by the Executive Committee was distributed and a motion to amend those changes was approved. The amendment to Article II was to standardize the ranks of faculty able to vote as the Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Several issues concerning faculty status were discussed.

Motion concerning voting rights with friendly amendment highlighted:

Therefore be it moved that the Arts and Sciences Governance Council approves the creation of consistent voting eligibility in regard to issues before the entire Faculty of Arts and Sciences. This standard of voting eligibility would apply to the following categories of faculty rostered in the College of Arts and Sciences, with appointments of at least 50 percent: Professors of any rank except adjunct or ‘of practice.’ Instructors of any rank and other voting faculty members as determined by each unit.

The motion with friendly amendment was passed unanimously.

Core Review Committee, Cora Randall, Ann Schmiesing

Information on the work of the Core Curriculum review Committee was available. Professor Randall emphasized that everything is on the table; if the suggestions made by the committee aren’t met favorably, they will start over. The committee doesn’t want changes that won’t be passed by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Professors Randall and Schmiesing opened the floor for questions and comments. Some of the topics discussed:

• The criteria of a core course is any course that counts for a major, any course that counts for a minor would count in the appropriate division. Any course currently in the core will be grandfathered in. Other courses can be nominated for the core and will be reviewed.
• Global and US Diversity keeping 6 credits was appreciated and it is hoped that 3 credits would be designated for Global requirements.
• The intent is to preserve rigor while making the core more flexible.
• Admiration for the current core was expressed and its focus on diversity.
• The concern was expressed that a distribution-based Core would not do enough to ensure that students in the College have the sort of experience traditionally associated with a liberal arts education.
• Foreign language requirements are still in place for all but a handful of students.
• The majority of faculty members that Professors Randall and Schmiesing have spoken with want the core to be revised to be more streamlined.
• The cost of changing the core was questioned.
• A report was made last year and the ASC voted to revise the curriculum. A minor “tweaking” of the core is possible rather than a complete revision.
• The Academic Advisors told Professors Randall and Schmiesing that the current core is at times an impediment to students getting their degrees, the rigidity of the core was mentioned.
• Double majors across departments of colleges should be made easier.

Professor Rupert encouraged the representatives to e-mail their comments to Professors Randal and Schmiesing.

The meeting was adjourned at 5:02.

Minutes submitted by Janice Jeffryes