The Arts & Sciences Council (ASC) meets regularly every academic year, including seven times during the 2010 to 2011 academic year. The notes from said meetings are found below:
March 17, 2011
The Arts and Sciences Council Meeting Minutes
Representatives present: Albert Alhadeff, AAH; Daniel Barth, PSYC; Loriliai Biernacki, RLST; Cynthia Carey, IPHY; John Cassano, ATOC; Elspeth Dusinberre, CLAS; Valerio Ferme, FRIT; Phillip Gilley, SLHS; Michael Greenwood, ECON; Asunción Horno-Degado, SPAN; David Jonas; CHEM; Daniel Jones, HONR; Susan Kent, HIST; Horst Mewes, PSCI; Adam Norris, APPM; Scott Parker, PHYS; Matthew Pranter, GEOL; Robert Rupert, PHIL; Payson Sheets, ANTH; Andrew Stuckey, ALC; Cindy White, COMM
Representatives not present: Giulia Bernardini, CLHM; Jack Burns, APS; Damian Doyle, PWR; Alison Jaggar, WMST; Catherine Labio, ENGL; Keith Kearnes, MATH; Daryl Maeda, ETHN; Andrew Martin, EBIO; Martha Palmer, LING; Cecilia Pang, THDN; Robert Poyton, MCDB; Robert Regoli, SOCY; Artemi Romanov, GSLL; Mark Serreze, GEOG
Ex-officio: Todd Gleeson
Also in attendance: Aisha Jackson, Michele Jackson, Viktoriya Oliynyk
Horst Mewes called the meeting to order at 3:37 PM.
The minutes of the February 17, 2011 meeting were approved unanimously.
Dean’s Remarks, Todd Gleeson
The Chairs and Directors have received the ASC’s document on the Status of Instructors and have been asked to forward any comments they may have to the Council.
A call for funding proposals will go out this year on May 15th after a few years when funds were not available. Units may consider making proposals for temporary money or continuing money for staff; anything other than funding for tenure track faculty. There won’t be an excess of funding for hiring tenure track faculty but Dean Gleeson will be accepting hiring proposals.
A donor, Gordon Gamm, is creating a fund to sponsor interdisciplinary courses. The financial barrier inherent in interdisciplinary courses has inhibited some creative curricular programing. $100,000 will fund 14 or 15 courses over the next 4 or 5 years. The courses must be interdisciplinary and must involve at least one A&S faculty member. The fund will be used to offset the “lost” course whether it is in our college or another. The proposal will be sent out in the Chairs and Directors minutes.
ASC Chair Election, Cindy Carey
All call for nominations for next year’s ASC chair was sent out and Horst Mewes was overwhelmingly nominated to stand for reelection. The vote will be held at the April 21st ASC/FAC meeting.
Chair’s Remarks, Horst Mewes
The CU Bookstore has stopped selling the class notes that were discussed at the last meeting, Buffnotes, for reasons of trademark infringement. CU’s legal office notes that faculty has legitimate claims to their course material; the intellectual content belongs to the faculty member and cannot be sold. The legal office will develop a formal permission process which will require note taking services to obtain permission from teaching faculty. Any claims against a note-taking service must be made by the individual faculty member; the legal department will not act of the behalf of the faculty in these cases.
Dean Gleeson sent out a draft of the Provost Office’s proposed response to section 2B of the BFA’s Status of Instructors document concerning instituting rigorous instructor review. The Provost Office proposes that instructors be appointed for 2 or 3 periods of appointment which may run for 6 or 10 years. After this time the instructor is required to stand for senior instructor. If they do not wish to be considered or do not successfully complete this review, their appointment will end after the second letter of appointment. The Executive Committee has discussed this proposal and unanimously rejected it. Asuncion Horno-Delgado (SPAN) stated that there are excellent junior instructors in SPAN who aren’t interested in getting a Ph.D. but the department needs them to teach. In looking for a positive it was suggested it would, for better or worse, force instructor turnover. Now that the college has put into effect some very strict rules about reappointment, the consensus was that this is not needed to remove under-performing instructors. David Jonas (CHEM) noted that a similar policy had been in effect in Germany and was discontinued as it wasn’t effective. This suggestion came from Faculty Affairs in response to the BFA Status of Instructors document. The Dean’s Council discussed it, Business and Engineering had no objections but it is being tabled until the ASC sends its recommendation. No other AAU universities have an “up or out” policy for instructors. The positive aspects of encouraging professional development and enabling turnover of instructors were mentioned by attending ASC representatives.
A formal vote isn’t needed but the representatives voted to let Dean Gleeson know the group’s opinion; 20 representatives voted against an “up or out” policy for instructors; there was one abstention.
The representatives discussed the advantages and disadvantages of having policies uniform throughout the college.
The new faculty rank, Professor of Practice, was approved by the Deans Council in 2007 but was never accepted system level. The Provost has asked that it be reviewed. The Law and Business Schools brought this issue up with the intent to have people who are extremely outstanding in their field or profession teach with this rank. These positions would be reserved for people of extraordinary accomplishment, i.e. a Supreme Court justice or astronaut, so would not likely be used often or encourage permanent employment. 16 ASC representatives were supportive of this new faculty rank and 5 abstained. Dean Gleeson will bring these opinions to the Dean’s Council.
ASSETT (Arts and Sciences Support of Education Through Technology), Michele Jackson
Professor Jackson introduced Technology Consultants Aisha Jackson and Viktoriya Oloynyk.
Desire2Learn (D2L), the replacement for CULearn, will begin initial testing with students summer 2011, in the fall, faculty may begin using it. In spring ’12, D2L will be the default program but faculty may still use CULearn. In the summer of 2012 everyone will be on D2L. ASSETT will be helping faculty and staff with the migration to this program.
ASSETT will also be developing a number of resources for pedagogical and technical support. By the ended of the summer there will be a “Getting Started Guide” and additional online resources tailored to Arts and Sciences by the end of spring. ASSETT is focused on creating within department support for using technology. ASSETT also provides Teaching Technology Assistants who will come to classes to help with technology issues.
The campus is also investing in lecture capture and ASSETT is working on deployment and functionality issues as well as developing needed policies. ASSETT is working with the understanding that academic content is first, then the content must be captured and delivered. ITS has installed lecture capture software in three classrooms chosen because of size and type of courses that use in them.
ASC may be looking as some of the policy issues ASSETT is dealing with.
Professor Jackson encouraged the ASC representatives to call ASSETT with any questions.
Film Studies Application for Department Status
This motion came from the Curriculum Committee; they have no objections. There will be no substantive costs related to this change.
It was moved and seconded that the ASC support the Film Studies Program becoming the Film Studies Department. 16 yes, 0 no, 0 abstentions.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:59.
Minutes Submitted by Janice Jeffryes
February 17, 2011
The Arts and Sciences Council Meeting Minutes
Representatives present: Albert Alhadeff, AAH; Daniel Barth, PSYC; Giulia Bernardini, CLHM; Loriliai Biernacki, RLST; Jack Burns, APS; Cynthia Carey, IPHY; John Cassano, ATOC; Damian Doyle, PWR; Elspeth Dusinberre, CLAS; Valerio Ferme, FRIT; Phillip Gilley, SLHS; Michael Greenwood, ECON; Asunción Horno-Degado, SPAN; David Jonas; CHEM; Daniel Jones, HONR; Susan Kent, HIST; Keith Kearnes, MATH; Horst Mewes, PSCI; Adam Norris, APPM; Cecilia Pang, THDN; Scott Parker, PHYS; Matthew Pranter, GEOL; Robert Regoli, SOCY; Artemi Romanov, GSLL; Robert Rupert, PHIL; Payson Sheets, ANTH; Andrew Stuckey, ALC; Cindy White, COMM
Representatives not present: Alison Jaggar, WMST; Catherine Labio, ENGL; Daryl Maeda, ETHN; Andrew Martin, EBIO; Martha Palmer, LING; Robert Poyton, MCDB; Mark Serreze, GEOG
Ex-officio: Todd Gleeson
Also present: Darna Dufour, Uriel Nauenberg, Sierra Swearingen
Horst Mewes called the meeting to order at 3:38 PM.
The minutes of the January 20, 2011 meeting were approved unanimously.
Boulder Faculty Assembly
Uriel Nauenberg, past chair of the BFA, asked the ASC representatives to let their departments know that the BFA is in need of new faculty representatives. Many representatives have been on the committee for multiple terms but for the health of the organization, a better rotation of members is needed. The chancellor is supportive of the BFA and attends meetings 2-3 times a year to discuss appointments and issues of importance to faculty. Professor Nauenberg asked the ASC representatives to suggest BFA to new faculty. On Feb 24, 3-4:30 in the UMC West Ballroom, the BFA will have a meeting to discuss getting a more diverse membership. Phil Di Stefano will be in attendance.
Dean’s Report, Todd Gleeson
The provost and chancellor have sent their recommendations on the School of Journalism and Mass Communication to the president and regents. The regents will take the matter up in the spring. The chancellor recommends ending the program as a school by the end of the fiscal year and moving it to the Graduate School for management until curriculum and organizational structure decisions are made. It was recommended that journalism becomes part of a double major or a certificate program.
Governor Hickenlooper has released his budget. This is not a final budget. It shows a $36.000.000 cut to higher education, approximately $10,000,000 will be cut from the Boulder Campus.
Film Studies has petitioned to convert from a program to a department. Although it may be unnecessary to have the ASC vote on this, in the spirit of self-governance, Dean Gleeson would like the ASC to vote and he’ll take the recommendation to the chancellor. This program has been at the university since 1972 and has offered degrees since 1989. There are approximately 10 tenure track faculty plus a roster of instructors. They offer a BFA and MFA and approximately 400 students major in Film Studies. This change will cause no additional expense.
The Dean’s office will comply with the new branding guidelines. There will be no enforcement in the departments.
In 2006 a proposal was made to the campus to create a new faculty title, Professor of Practice. There will be no assistant or associate. An individual holding this title will normally hold the terminal degree and be someone whose work in the field is recognized as significant. This title is for people who have gained the substantial part of their experience outside academia; this is not a tenure track position and is similar to Sr. Instructor. Dean Gleeson has 30 days to respond and would like the ASC’s feedback. Professor Mewes will send the proposal to the membership and solicit feedback by e-mail.
Academic Affairs prepared a response to the BFA Report on the Status of Instructors which included a statement concerning section 2B that Dean Gleeson would like ASC feedback on. That recommendation follows these minutes. Professor Mewes will solicit feedback by e-mail.
Motion Concerning College Level Review System for Instructors, Loriliai Biernacki, Chair, Grievance Committee and Susan Kent, Chair, Personnel Committee
This motion was discussed with the Associate Deans and a new version was devised. Professor Mewes suggested the structure of this new process should be tried out and fine-tuned by the Personnel Committee rather than the ASC addressing each possible problem before a vote.
Motion: That the College introduce an additional level of review by the ASC Personnel Committee for instructor reappointment cases that receive a negative vote.
The current arrangement relies upon the Grievance Committee to act outside of its appropriate scope of duties. We believe the Personnel Committee can better adjudicate these cases without becoming unduly burdened. The procedure outlined below follows as much as possible those in place for comprehensive review, promotion and tenure, and promotion to full professor cases.
In the event of a positive review, the case will go to the appropriate associate dean for approval. In the event of a negative outcome at the PUEC, unit, or chair/director level, the case will go to a sub-committee of the Personnel Committee and from there to the associate dean. If the decision is negative, the instructor will have fourteen days from the time of notification of the negative decision to request a review of her/his case. The case will then go to the ASC Personnel Committee (minus the sub-committee) for review. The Personnel Committee makes its recommendation in accordance with criteria for instructor reappointment established by the Office of Faculty Affairs, to wit, excellence in classroom teaching or in classroom teaching in combination with other student-oriented activities. If the Personnel Committee concurs with the negative outcome, it will make its recommendation to the dean. If the committee disagrees with the negative decision, the case will return to the associate dean for further consideration. Upon receipt of the associate dean’s reconsideration, the Personnel Committee will review the case again and make its recommendation to the dean.
The motion was moved and seconded and passed unanimously.
The changes will take place immediately.
Vote on Curriculum Committee Recommendations, Valerio Ferme
Professor Ferme followed up on last month’s discussion and found there is no group that reviews certificates that cross college boundaries.
Motion: The Curriculum Committee recommends the creation of a university faculty committee to oversee campus-wide certificates.
The motion was moved and seconded and passed unanimously.
The second recommendation from the Curriculum Committee was discussed and changed to specify the amount of certificates need to be awarded to avoid a review.
Motion: The Curriculum Committee recommends that every low activity (less than 5 certificates over a 5 year period) Arts and Sciences certificate program should be reviewed every five (5) years by the Curriculum Committee to ensure that both the program and its curriculum are still viable.
The motion was moved and seconded and passed unanimously.
The Curriculum Committee has created a sub-committee to look at the writing requirement; every division is represented in this process.
Chair’s Report, Horst Mewes
Professor Mewes introduced the ASC’s recommendations on the status of instructors to the BFA and those recommendations have gone to the BFA’s Faculty Committee. The BFA agreed with the council’s recommendations and also tabled the issue of instructor tenure. It is not clear what the outcome will be or if there will be any campus-wide enforcement of these recommendations. Dean Gleeson will be handing these out at the next Chairs and Directors meeting.
Professor Mewes has invited Michele Jackson from ASSETT (Arts and Sciences Support of Education Through Technology) to report on the services they provide in recording entire semester classes. In the future there may be policy issues the council will need to vote on concerning use of these recordings.
Professor Mewes has looked into the issues of class note-taking services to see if the council wanted to discuss this practice. There are several such services but one, Buff Notes, sells their notes through the campus bookstore. The company hires students who take notes in class; the company “enhances” them and sells them. Jason Katzman of the CU Bookstore spoke with Professor Mewes and said the bookstore makes no money off these notes, only sells them to bring students into the bookstore. The representatives had differing opinions on this practice and asked Professor Mewes to look into the policies of universities that require faculty consent before notes are taken in their class.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:55pm.
Minutes submitted by Janice Jeffryes
January 20, 2011
The Arts and Sciences Council Meeting Minutes
Representatives present: Albert Alhadeff, AAH; Daniel Barth, PSYC; Loriliai Biernacki, RLST; Cynthia Carey, IPHY; Damian Doyle, PWR; Elspeth Dusinberre, CLAS; Valerio Ferme, FRIT; Phillip Gilley, SLHS; Michael Greenwood, ECON; Asunción Horno-Degado, SPAN; David Jonas; CHEM; Daniel Jones, HONR; Susan Kent, HIST; Catherine Labio, ENGL; Daryl Maeda, ETHN; Andrew Martin, EBIO; Horst Mewes, PSCI; Adam Norris, APPM; Martha Palmer, LING; Cecilia Pang, THDN; Scott Parker, PHYS; Matthew Pranter, GEOL; Artemi Romanov, GSLL; Robert Rupert, PHIL; Payson Sheets, ANTH; Andrew Stuckey, ALC; Cindy White, COMM
Representatives not present: Giulia Bernardini, CLHM; Jack Burns, APS; John Cassano, ATOC; Alison Jaggar, WMST; Robert Poyton, MCDB; Robert Regoli, SOCY; Mark Serreze, GEOG
Also present: Todd Gleeson
Horst Mewes called the meeting to order at 3:37 PM. Artemi Romanov, the new representative from GSLL, was introduced.
The minutes of the December 9, 2010 meeting were approved with one change; Michael Greenwood was in attendance.
Dean’s Report, Todd Gleeson
The college received $4 million in continuing money from the provost. This money had been held aside to prepare for future cuts in allocations from the state; it came from a combination of budget cuts in the colleges, student and tuition growth. A total of $6 million was given to the campus to address past enrollment growth. Dean Gleeson will be discussing this money with the Budget Committee at the next meeting. Another allocation is expected in 2014. Currently, Dean Gleeson isn’t sure if the money will be used for projected growth or past shortages.
The provost is working towards a mathematically based way to allocate funds. 2.6 million is the approximate cost to the university of 100 students.
Dean Gleeson had no word on the possibility of raises next year.
Notice of Motion Concerning College Level Review System for Instructors, Loriliai Biernacki, Chair, Grievance Committee and Susan Kent, Chair, Personnel Committee
The Grievance Committee has been seeing more instructor non-reappointment grievances. Non-reappointments on the basis of merit are not within this committee’s proper scope of duties. Professor Biernacki met with Dean Gleeson and Susan Kent and they propose involving the Personnel Committee in instructor grievances. After this meeting’s discussion, Professors Biernacki and Kent will send out a motion to be voted on at the February meeting. Dean Gleeson said the new policy will apply to all cases received after the ASC has voted. Cases in which instructors who are not reappointed due to programmatic or financial grounds, will go to the dean.
Professor Kent would prefer that appeals are automatic when instructors are non-reappointed. The alternative is instructors choosing to appeal after a non-reappointment decision.
Pertinent points of the ensuing discussion follow:
A Notice of Motion will go out by e-mail and friendly amendments would be appreciated.
Vote on Curriculum Committee Recommendations, Valerio Ferme
Last year the ASC voted to change the unit requirements on certificate programs. Dean Gleeson had questions and the Curriculum Committee came up with 2 two motions to address possible problems:
- The Curriculum Committee recommends the creation of a university faculty committee to oversee campus-wide certificates.
- The Curriculum Committee recommends that every certificate program, regardless of where it resides, should be reviewed every five (5) years to ensure that both the program and its curriculum are still viable.
Professor Jonas questioned the need for review every 5 years. The Curriculum Committee will reword the second motion to trigger reviews if there is no activity in the program or major programmatic change.
Concerning the 1st motion, the Vice Chancellor for Research is in charge of evaluating centers; it is possible they could oversee certificates and a new committee wouldn’t need to be formed. Professor Ferme will look into this and report to the council next month.
Meeting adjourned 5:00
Minutes submitted by Janice Jeffryes
December 9, 2010
The Arts and Sciences Council Meeting Minutes
Representatives present: Daniel Barth, PSYC; Giulia Bernardini, CLHM; Loriliai Biernacki, RLST; Jack Burns, APS; John Cassano, ATOC; Damian Doyle, PWR; Elspeth Dusinberre, CLAS; Carla Farsi, MATH; Valerio Ferme, FRIT; Phillip Gilley, SLHS; Michael Greenwood, ECON; Asunción Horno-Degado, SPAN; Alison Jaggar, WMST; David Jonas; CHEM; Catherine Labio, ENGL; Daryl Maeda, ETHN; Andrew Martin, EBIO; Horst Mewes. PSCI; Adam Norris, APPM; Martha Palmer, LING; Scott Parker, PHYS; Matthew Pranter, GEOL; Robert Rupert, PHIL; Payson Sheets, ANTH; Cindy White, COMM
Representatives not present: Albert Alhadeff, AAH; Cynthia Carey, IPHY; Thomas Hollweck, GSLL; Daniel Jones, HONR; Susan Kent, HIST; Cecilia Pang, THDN; Robert Poyton, MCDB; Robert Regoli, SOCY; Mark Serreze, GEOG; Andrew Stuckey, ALC;
Also present: Darna Dufour, Todd Gleeson
Horst Mewes called the meeting to order at 3:40 PM.
The minutes of the November 18, 2010 meeting were approved unanimously.
Dean’s Report, Todd Gleeson
Report on the Status of Instructors
Vote to endorse section 1 on the BFA Report on the Status of Instructors with the following additions to 1A and 1F:
1A: A firm requirement for departments to update and adhere to their by-laws and campus policies with respect to broad participation of instructors in unit affairs.
1F: Any lecturer who has taught at 50% or more for at least three years should be considered by the unit for appointment as a rostered instructor; when possible, the school/college and campus administration should assist the unit in making this change possible.
20 for changes, 1 against, 3 abstentions
2A, which is implemented policy, was questioned concerning meaningful review of instructors. Dean Gleeson told the Council that a directive came from his office directing instructors to be reviewed similarly to tenure track faculty with a written PUEC report.
Vote for changes on 2C:
Substitute for 2C: The non-renewal of an instructor’s contract should be related to performance, programmatic change or financial exigency.
ASC suggestion: a college level review system should be in place, reviewing only cases with split or negative votes.
(Chair’s comment: The ASC, by consensus, suggested to the Dean, who was open to the suggestion, that the possibility of establishing such a review be pursued by the Dean’s office. )
21 for changes, 2 against, 1 abstention
2D: Vote to pass as written: 21 to pass, 2 against passage, 1 abstention
Vote to substitute for 2E:
We recommend that differential workloads be considered.
20 for change, 3 against, 1 abstention
Vote to delete 2F: 21 in favor of deleting, 2 against, 1 abstention
The assembled discussed 2G; multi-year contracts can be nullified as Colorado is an “Employment At Will” state.
Vote to delete 2h: 22 to delete, 0 against, 2 abstentions
Vote to change 2J:
Instructors should be encouraged to apply and compete for open tenured or tenure-track appointments.
18 in favor of change, 2 against, 4 abstentions
The Equal Process and Uniform Standard Committee of the Faculty Council has recommended Section 3 not be considered.
Vote to delete 3A: 16 in favor of deletion, 3 against, 5 abstentions
Professor Mewes will report on the ASC’s votes to the BFA.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:50 PM.
The next ASC meeting will be Thursday, January 20, 2011, 3:30 PM to 5:00 PM
Boulder Faculty Assembly, Executive Committee
Motion to Endorse the Recommendations of the BFA Ad Hoc Committee on Instructor Status
BFA-X-M-022210
INSERTS: CHANGES VOTED BY ASC, Dec. 9
The Boulder Faculty Assembly Executive Committee moves that the BFA endorse, and request the UCB Administration to implement, the following recommendations from the BFA Ad Hoc Committee on Instructor Status (Report and Recommendations from the BFA Ad Hoc Committee on the Status of Instructors):
Clarification and enforcement of current policy. These recommendations speak to many of the concerns about the status accorded to instructors and the sometimes negative climate in which they work:
Vote to insert language:
1A: A firm requirement for departments to update and adhere to their by-laws and campus policies with respect to broad participation of instructors in unit affairs.
1B: All instructor letters of agreement (aka contracts) should consider workload requirements in ways that allow for performance and evaluation of service.
1C: Treatment of instructors (and other non-tenure-track faculty) must be a specific and required aspect of performance reviews of department chairs, program directors, and deans.
1D: Conflict resolution services and grievance procedures should be responsive to the needs of instructors.
1E: Each unit should put in place a system of instructor mentoring.
Vote to insert language:
1F: Any lecturer who has taught at 50% or more for at least three years should be considered by the unit for appointment as a rostered instructor; when possible,the school/college and campus administration should assist the unit in making this change possible.
1G: The Boulder Faculty Assembly, in concert with the Office of Faculty Affairs, is charged with reporting regularly on the status and conditions of instructors, and on the implementation and coordination of policies pertaining to instructors.
Contractual issues in employment and career management. These pragmatic recommendations call upon existing policy and administrative tools that could be used more effectively and proactively.
2A: The campus must develop a climate of meaningful review for instructors that goes beyond current practices. This is already A+S policy.
2B: The campus must clarify the distinction between instructor and senior instructor, regularize procedures for what should be a rigorous review, and offer rewards for this promotion.
2C: The non-renewal of an instructor’s contract should be related to one of three causes: poor Performance, major programmatic change, or financial exigency; in the event of a non-renewal that does not meet this test, the unit should lose the instructor line.
Substitute for 2C: The non-renewal of an instructor’s contract should be related to performance, programmatic change or financial exigency.
ASC suggestion: a college level review system should be in place, reviewing only cases with split or negative votes.
(Chair’s comment: The ASC, by consensus, suggested to the Dean, who was open to the suggestion, that the possibility of establishing such a review be pursued by the Dean’s office. )
2D: In the event of program discontinuance, the campus should make every effort to relocate instructors and senior instructors to other units; should program discontinuance require the termination of instructors or senior instructors, the campus must provide those Senior Instructors as well as those Instructors who have served seven or more years of full-time service or its equivalent to the University who have been identified in any plan for termination with one year of notice before termination.
2E: We recommend the active use of differential workloads as a tool for more effective instructor career management.
Substitute for 2E: We recommend that differential workloads be considered.
2F: The Committee urges campus administration in the strongest possible terms to reject a proposal for uncompensated workload increases, as they have an enormous negative effect not only on individual instructors but also on the status and climate for instructors, on the quality of undergraduate education, and on the very institutional initiatives that the campus seeks to preserve and develop. (Vote to delete 2F)
2G: To the full extent permitted by law, the campus should offer long-term (multi-year), presumptively renewable contracts to both instructors and senior instructors.
2H: The campus should make high performing senior instructors eligible for an annual update or resetting of the terminal date of a multi-year letter of agreement (aka contract). (vote to delete 2H)
2I: The campus should award the title of “Senior Instructor of Distinction” to a subset of highly qualified senior instructors.
2J: Utilizing existing tenure guidelines, the campus should permit exceptionally qualified senior instructors to access tenured or tenure-track appointments through a process of line conversion. (Substitute for 2J: Instructors should be encouraged to apply and compete for open tenured or tenure-track appointments.)
Instructor tenure as provided through the creation of a new series of faculty ranks. This recommendation requires approval at the system level and a change in the Laws of the Regents.
3A: The Boulder Faculty Assembly and the campus administration should initiate discussions with the other campuses and with Faculty Council that would consider the merits of creating, with regential approval, new tenure-track ranks for teaching faculty, with the same differentiation in ranks (asst., assoc., full professor) as for research faculty, but with the designation “teaching professor” or some equivalent term. The current ranks of Instructor and Senior Instructor would continue. Both current faculty and future hires would themselves determine whether or not to pursue a tenure-tenure track teaching position or to apply for an advertised tenure-tenure track teaching position. (Vote to delete 3A)
From BFA Executive Committee: February 22, 2010
Notice of motion to the BFA: March 4, 2010
Motion amended by the Executive Committee: March 8, 2010
Approved as Amended by the BFA: April 1, 2010
November 18, 2010
The Arts and Sciences Council Meeting Minutes
Representatives present: Daniel Barth, PSYC; Giulia Bernardini, CLHM; Loriliai Biernacki, RLST; Cynthia Carey, IPHY; John Cassano, ATOC; Damian Doyle, PWR; Elspeth Dusinberre, CLAS; Carla Farsi, MATH; Valerio Ferme, FRIT; Asunción Horno-Degado, SPAN; David Jonas; CHEM; Daniel Jones, HONR; Susan Kent, HIST; Catherine Labio, ENGL; Horst Mewes. PSCI; Adam Norris, APPM; Martha Palmer, LING; Cecilia Pang, THDN; Scott Parker, PHYS; Matthew Pranter, GEOL; Robert Rupert, PHIL; Payson Sheets, ANTH; Andrew Stuckey, ALC
Representatives not present: Albert Alhadeff, AAH; Jack Burns, APS; Phillip Gilley, SLHS; Michael Greenwood, ECON; Thomas Hollweck, GSLL; Alison Jaggar, WMST; Daryl Maeda, ETHN; Andrew Martin, EBIO; Robert Poyton, MCDB; Robert Regoli, SOCY; Mark Serreze, GEOG; Cindy White, COMM
Also present: Doug Bamforth; Todd Gleeson
Horst Mewes called the meeting to order at 3:36 PM.
The minutes of the October 21, 2010 meeting were approved unanimously.
Chairs’ Remarks, Horst Mewes
Dean’s Report, Todd Gleeson
Report on Residential Academic Programs (RAPS), Doug Bamforth, RAP Council Chair
Report from the Grievance Committee, Loriliai Biernacki
- The Grievance Committee has had four cases in the last 2 years involving instructor reappointments. The committee recommends that the Personnel Committee review instructor non-reappointments where there is a disagreement between the department reappointment committee and the chair.
- The Grievance Committee members see deep problems in the instructor’s employment situation; instructors don’t currently have recourse if they feel they have been treated unfairly. An independent review may help alleviate some of the problems addressed in the BFA Report on the Status of Instructors.
- The Grievance Committee originally looked at only tenure track faculty grievances and those were generally salary disputes. Last year instructor grievances were added to the committee’s responsibilities. The Grievance Committee members feel it isn’t the proper committee to adjudicate between cases on the grounds of merit.
- Dean Gleeson, Professor Susan Kent, Professor Mewes and the Grievance Committee will meet to discuss the possibility of adding instructor reappointment reviews to the Personnel Committee duties.
BFA Report on Status of Instructors
The meeting was adjourned at 4:59 PM.
The next meeting will be a combined ASC/FAC meeting, Thursday, December 9, 2010, 3:30 PM in the Old Main Chapel.
Minutes submitted by Janice Jeffryes
October 21, 2010
The Arts and Sciences Council Meeting Minutes
Representatives present: Daniel Barth, PSYC; Giulia Bernardini, CLHM; Loriliai Biernacki, RLST; Jack Burns, APS; Cynthia Carey, IPHY; Damian Doyle, PWR; Elspeth Dusinberre, CLAS; Carla Farsi, MATH; Valerio Ferme, FRIT; Phillip Gilley, SLHS; Michael Greenwood, ECON; Thomas Hollweck, GSLL; Asunción Horno-Degado, SPAN; David Jonas; CHEM; Daniel Jones, HONR; Susan Kent, HIST; Catherine Labio, ENGL; Daryl Maeda, ETHN; Andrew Martin, EBIO; Horst Mewes. PSCI; Bhuvana Narasimhan, LING; Adam Norris, APPM; Martha Palmer, LING; Cecilia Pang, THDN; Scott Parker, PHYS; Matthew Pranter, GEOL; Robert Regoli, SOCY; Robert Rupert, PHIL; Payson Sheets, ANTH; Andrew Stuckey, ALC; Cindy White, COMM
Representatives not present: Albert Alhadeff, AAH; John Cassano, ATOC; Alison Jaggar, WMST; Robert Poyton, MCDB; Mark Serreze, GEOG
Also present: David Boonin
Horst Mewes called the meeting to order at 3:35 PM.
The minutes of the September 16, 2010 meeting were approved unanimously.
Diversity Committee Report, Cecilia Pang
Curriculum Committee Report, Valerio Ferme
Discussion on the BFA Resolution on Instructors
- At the last ASC meeting, the council voted to discuss the resolution and asked Professor Mewes to let the BFA know that it was being discussed and asked no action be taken until the council has a chance to report.
- Professor Mewes asked the council to look at parts 1 and 2 of the resolution separately from part 3; the departments will be asked to comply with the first 2 sections; the 3rd consists of recommendations. The BFA recommends the first 2 sections will be made part of departmental procedures and an element of the 7 year cycle of reviews. Sample bylaws concerning the treatment of instructors may also be written to serve as a model for the departments.
- Theatre and Dance submitted a statement concerning the BFA resolution:
- Instructors feel THDN is a good model for how the instructor status issues can be handled better by the University in that our By-Laws include instructor participation in departmental governance. Instructors are not adjunct faculty—their level of experience and expertise is substantial and we depend on them to carry an important core of our curriculum. What they provide cannot be farmed out to part-time employees. THDN is aware there are many discipline-specific differences in how instructors are utilized in different departments. So we hope that the future will be flexible enough to accommodate the needs of specific disciplines.
- It was clarified that this document refers to instructors on a permanent line. The document does not refer to lecturers.
- Line conversion was discussed. A line conversion, Sr. Instructor to Assistant Professor, wouldn’t necessarily require a national search if the resolution is followed. Laws of the Regents currently allow these conversions.
- Robert Rupert, PHIL, expressed concern that this resolution doesn’t serve the research mission of the university, particularly in the humanities.
- Daniel Barth, PSYC, collected his department’s reactions. PSYC supports fair treatment for instructors and support of teaching associate professors was expressed. Also, a department member was concerned that the focus on teaching would take scarce resources from research.
- Chonin Horno-Delgado, SPAN, let the council know the importance of instructors to the languages and their desire to treat them fairly.
- Cindy White, COMM; the department generally supports section 1 with the exception of 1f. Sections 2c, 2d, 2e and 2f were also of concern.
- The equitability of teaching loads was discussed.
- Faculty Affairs and the Provost set how instructors are hired, 3/3 with service.
- Returning to multi-year contracts is planned.
- Susan Kent; HIST; asked a question for the instructors; 30 percent of the teaching at CU Boulder is done by instructors, don’t they deserve some stability?
- Some departments have consciously decided not to have instructors; some departments use instructors for introductory courses, others do not. There is a great variety in the way instructors are used between the departments. Some instructors vote in faculty decisions, in other departments they have no voting rights.
- Grievance Committee members have recently seen mistreatment of instructors; lack of consistency, transparency and clear policies. The Grievance Committee would like to see a Personnel Committee review of instructor reviews and non-renewals.
- In the next meeting the ASC will vote on section 1 and ask for specifc suggestions on 2. Professor Mewes will make a report to the BFA.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:04.
The next meeting will be on Thursday, November 18, 2010 in UMC 415/417.
Minutes submitted by Janice Jeffryes
September 16, 2010
The Arts and Sciences Council Meeting Minutes
Members present: Daniel Barth, PSYC; Giulia Bernardini, CLHM; Loriliai Biernacki, RLST; Jack Burns, APS; John Cassano, ATOC; Damian Doyle, PWR; Carla Farsi, MATH; Valerio Ferme, FRIT; Phillip Gilley, SLHS; Michael Greenwood, ECON; Asunción Horno-Degado, SPAN; David Jonas; CHEM; Daniel Jones, HONR; Susan Kent, HIST; Daryl Maeda, ETHN; Andrew Martin, EBIO; Horst Mewes. PSCI; Bhuvana Narasimhan, LING; Adam Norris, APPM; Cecilia Pang, THDN; Scott Parker, PHYS; Matthew Pranter, GEOL; Robert Regoli, SOCY; Robert Rupert, PHIL; Payson Sheets, ANTH; Andrew Stuckey, ALC; Cindy White, COMM
Members not present: Albert Alhadeff, AAH; Cynthia Carey, IPHY; Elspeth Dusinberre, CLAS; Thomas Hollweck, GLSS; Alison Jaggar, WMST; Catherine Labio, ENGL; Robert Poyton, MCDB; Mark Serreze, GEOG
Also present: Darna Dufour, Todd Gleeson
Horst Mewes called the meeting to order at 3:32 PM.
The minutes of the April 16, 2010 meeting were approved unanimously.
Chair’s Remarks, Horst Mewes
Dean’s Remarks, Todd Gleeson
- The Buffalo Bicycle Classic was cancelled due to the demands put on local law enforcement during the 4 Mile Fire. The main purpose of the ride is to raise scholarship money and the best financial scenario in terms of protecting student scholarship money was to cancel rather than try to reschedule. Most sponsors will leave their funding. Participants and donors have been asked to leave their money in the scholarship fund; in a few weeks the college will know if the scholarship money will be preserved.
- Two years ago the college ended the year with a 3.5 million dollar deficit; the Provost provided 2 million dollars but A&S is still behind 1.5 million. After budget cuts, the college ended the recent fiscal year 350 thousand in the red.
- With 2 million less in the budget this year there is very little hiring and 2/3 less Leave and Replacement money. Faculty will find more instances of chairs reassigning courses to fit budgetary concerns.
- To help departments address teaching load assignment issues and to help the Dean’s office understand the workload across the campus, a metric was introduced to the chairs early this semester. The metric illustrates the number of student credit hours faculty are teaching on a per tenure track faculty member basis.
- The Chancellor has instructed the campus to engage in a program discontinuance exercise in relation to the School of Journalism and Mass Communication. The review committee is asking if that school is offering what it should be offering to students and whether it would be better presented in another department. The issuance of the Notice of Discontinuance allows the campus to retain or dismiss faculty regardless of tenure status. There will be a recommendation in 60 days.
- Another committee is looking at how the campus is addressing issues of information and media studies and whether an organizational or curricular change that might facilitate that type of curriculum. A&S will probably be asked to play a role in what happens.
- The data on student credit hours in each department is available to the public on the PBA website.
- Dean Gleeson anticipates going though one more budget cutting exercise.
- Problems with the new ISIS were discussed. The Director of Admissions is confident that the system will work correctly in the next round of admissions. Arts and Sciences advisors are taking the brunt of the problems. It appears the University underinvested in the programming expertise needed to modify the program.
Curriculum Committee Priorities, Valerio Ferme
- The current ongoing task of the Curriculum Committee is the review of the Natural Science Core; the committee is hoping to be finished within the next 3 to 4 months. If a course is urgent, please contact Professor Ferme.
- The Curriculum Committee is going through a list of suggested budget cuts relating to curriculum and currently considering giving retroactive credit for introductory classes to people coming to the University with language skills. The student must be willing to take a more advanced course and pass with a certain grade. This will place a greater burden on 2nd and 3rd year courses.
- The committee is considering transferring the 3rd year writing requirements to departments that might qualify. John Ackerman, chair of PWR, will come to talk to the Curriculum Committee.
- The committee is considering giving 3rd year writing credit to students who are doing an honors thesis in departments that have an honors seminar; they are also consulting with PWR on this.
- The committee had suggested allowing the Natural Science lab core to count for the Quantitative Reasoning and Mathematical Skills (QRMS) credit but that is getting a negative response from the Natural Sciences. It is felt QRMS should be completed before taking a lab class.
- The Curriculum Committee feels that the Associate Deans, working with the department chairs, should be making the decisions concerning increased enrollment in core courses.
BFA Resolution on Instructors and Current Plans for Implementation, Horst Mewes
The meeting was adjourned at 4:56.
The next ASC meeting will be Thursday, October 21, 2010 in UMC 415-417
Minutes submitted by Janice Jeffryes