Committees Educational Policy and Governance Macalester College

Educational Policy and Governance (EPAG)

 

EPAG Minutes
September 11, 2007
4:30-6:00, CC 214

Fahima Aziz (ACE fellow for fall semester), Kendrick Brown (Chair),  Pete Ferderer, Terri Fishel, Dan Keyser, David Martyn, Diane Michelfelder, Jayne Niemi, Peter Weisensel,  Eric Wiertelak, Karl Wirth

  1. A meeting of the grants committee is scheduled for September 19th.  A draft copy of the agenda was distributed.   Kendrick represents EPAG on this committee.
  2. A meeting of the Institute for Global Citizenship (IGC) Advisory Committee has also been scheduled.  Kendrick represents EPAG on this committee.  No agenda has been distributed so far.
  3. Kendrick will also represent EPAG on the Campus Campaign Advisory Committee.  
  4. Diane introduced Fahima Aziz, the ACE fellow at Macalester for fall semester.  She comes to us from the Economics department at Hamline University.
  5. An alternate is needed for the Board of Trustees Campus Life Committee Meeting.    Eric volunteered as long as the meeting is before the 10:50 class period, and volunteered if it’s after his 9:40 class.  Kendrick will confirm the meeting time.
  6. The committee agreed that Jayne may post (on the Registrar’s web page) courses that meet the Multiculturalism requirement as courses that will meet the Domestic Diversity requirement as well.  The previous EPAG had agreed that she could make individual exceptions as needed, but posting the available courses provides more assurance to students.
  7. We discussed the EPAG review of committee structure, acknowledging that the preliminary timeline was a bit ambitious.  Certainly, review can take place this year, but any proposals for restructuring will likely need more consideration before a vote can take place.  We decided that this review should not be done only by EPAG itself.  The process should be more open, and could be handled by an ad hoc committee with a very clear mission.    This would allow past EPAG members as well as other to contribute.  Please send suggestions for membership on this committee to Kendrick via email. 
  8. We discussed the document that was used to solicit nominations the last time the CST Directorship was open.  Kendrick reported on what he learned about the process from Karine Moe, who was involved in the last search.  It makes sense to wait to revise this document until after the CST review.  We’re hoping for some preliminary feedback from the reviewers in advance of their final documents, so that the timeline won’t be delayed.  Diane hopes to have the hiring process concluded this semester.    There was much discussion of Item 1.e. on page 2 of the nomination document, which talks about providing input into faculty review procedures.  This point provides a “firewall” between the Provost and the Director.   There were various suggestions about alternatives such as allowing letters to be written and sealed prior to a person’s appointment to the Directorship, or allowing candidates in the Director’s department to request letters, if needed.   When making updates to the document, we must make sure the mission statement here is current, and that the grant-writing piece is added to the job description.   Kendrick will send around relevant parts of the CST review document for our consideration as we review and edit the nomination document.
  9. A draft of a motion to change the faculty meeting time was distributed.  We discussed options for those rare meetings when a continuance is necessary.  The next Tuesday seems reasonable as long as other third-Tuesday commitments are avoided. The motion needs to be on the agenda for the October meeting.
  10. The latest version of the Appeal Process document was reviewed and discussed, after Kendrick gave a brief review of last year’s activities. This will be the procedure that the newly established appeal committee will follow should there be any appeals to personnel decisions. A few editorial changes were made for clarity.  Other issues discussed were as follows: what can be part of fact gathering when an appeal is only supposed to be about procedural errors; should we be more specific about excluding legal counsel; how can overall policies and procedures be improved based on what’s learned with each appeal. Privacy responsibility was also discussed.  Kendrick will try to incorporate the suggested changes, Diane will check with the college’s attorney, and we’ll keep this moving so that it can be voted on at the October faculty meeting.
  11. FPC has been asked by the President to come up with a strategic plan for adding new tenure-track faculty positions.  A joint committee is being formed, and there will be 3 EPAG members. This would be a year-long commitment with the task of identifying priorities for the college.  Kendrick will be serving, and he asked for volunteers, keeping in mind divisional representation.  Allocations for this year could be impacted by this effort.  
  12. Karl reminded the group that we should establish the deadlines for the next round of General Education considerations. 

Adjourned 6:05 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Jayne Niemi, Registrar

 


Macalester College · 1600 Grand Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55105  USA · 651-696-6000
Comments and questions to webmaster@macalester.edu