EPAG Minutes
November 6, 2006
2:45-4:15, Campus Center 205

Kendrick Brown, Beth Cleary, Cheryl Contant, Natalia Espejo,  Ellen Guyer, Diane Michelfelder, Jayne Niemi, Joan Ostrove, Wang Ping, Michael Schneider,  Peter Weisensel (co-chair), Karl Wirth (co-chair)

Special guest:  Terri Fishel

  1. The minutes from the October 30th meeting were approved.
  2. We reviewed the calendar for allocation requests.  The Provost proposes moving allocations to sooner rather than later.  This would allow her the chance to meet earlier with chairs, which then allows chairs to be more proactive in seeking a more diverse pool.  Last year, a memo was sent January 6th, with due date of February 24th, after EPAG discussed all the cases decisions were made on May 4th.   Then initial search meetings ran far too late into the summer.   We all agreed that an earlier start to the process would help all parties, and that EPAG may have to schedule special meetings to deal solely with allocations requests.  Our next step is to review the EPAG allocations guidelines and update the document as necessary.  Then Diane can move ahead with the process.
  3. We considered the possibility of adding a new ex officio member to EPAG, representing the library.   This would require a change to the by-laws.   Terri Fishel presented the library’s point of view, describing the advantages for the library staff, EPAG, and the development of the curriculum.   She explained that the range of activities in the library may not be as transparent to the campus as she would wish, citing the copyright committee as an example.  EPAG had questions about the time commitment, opening up to requests for representation from other areas that touch the curriculum (both academic and student-life areas).  Some expressed that we should have an intentional and broader discussion of the duties and structure of the committee, recalling that there was an evaluation piece that was supposed to happen a number of years after EPAG came into being.   It seems that in theory this could be a beneficial move, but in some ways it doesn’t seem practical, especially since many meetings are devoted to non-curricular issues.   We agreed that we would invite a library representative as a guest at our meetings for the remainder of the year, and evaluate the issue again after that experience. 
  4. We reviewed the latest version of the appeals motion that is to be presented (hopefully) at the December faculty meeting.  There were some suggestions to clarify language in the text that Peter will take back to FPC.   
  5. We reviewed and confirmed the ExCo decision for those who were absent from the previous meeting.   Many of us have been impressed with the passion of innovation, and the hard work that has been done.  We want to consider other ways to support their efforts.
  6. We were alerted to an allocation issue from 2005 which we will have to consider in the future.    
  7. An appeal to a study away decision has been received.  We will deal with that and any other appeals that are received at our next meeting.  Expect copies to be delivered to you.
  8. GES applications are near readiness.  The new deadline is Monday, December 4th. 

Adjourned 4:20 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Jayne Niemi, Registrar