October 30, 2007
4:30-6:00, CC 215
Kendrick Brown (chair), Pete Ferderer, Terri Fishel, Ellen Guyer, Dan Keyser, Paul Maitland-McKinney, David Martyn, Diane Michelfelder, Jayne Niemi, Manoj Vemula, Peter Weisensel, Eric Wiertelak
- Paul reminded the group of the upcoming debates between Donna Brazile and Ron Christie, and invited all to attend.
- The minutes were awesome, and therefore approved.
- Kendrick had circulated a summary of the Grants Committee meeting by email. One of the points he wanted to emphasize from that summary was that faculty governance will be respected. The point was made that there are many possible overlaps among some concentrations. Also noted was the perception of grant resources being available to some programs and not others, creating negative perceptions about level playing fields. We want to be sure that all concentrations available to all kinds of interested students, and not targeted to specific majors.
- At the Joint RPC/EPAG/Chairs meeting, they discussed announcing the existence of the committee. They also pondered the timing of their work as it regards the regular allocations process of EPAG. Kendrick is hoping that the handbook language on allocation guidelines would be revised by the joint committee. We need either Paul or Manoj to re the student EPAG representative to the joint committee.
- Kendrick reported that the Faculty Personnel Committee will be circulating a memo to faculty about revising Section 6 of handbook. He also reported the chair of FPC and Dean Jane Rhodes are doing preliminary work for a discussion of the College’s affirmative action policy.
- General Education Requests: The deadline has passed, and Karl has passed the data to the subcommittee chairs.
- The course changes presented by Jayne in a draft memo were approved.
- We did one last review of the Honors procedures memo, making a few clarifying changes. Terri’s questions about evaluations, preparation and standards are all answered by “it varies by department”.
- We considered the very thorough reply from the Mathematics and Computer Science Department to our questions about their request for a major in Applied Math and Statistics. Some were and others were not swayed by the argument for a separate major versus a track. We discussed the importance of visibility and signaling, and whether those goals were enough reason to create a new major. Paul reported on a student’s query to MCSG about the lack of a statistics major at Mac. There is precedence in the academy for applied majors in addition to theoretical, but does it apply to liberal arts, at Macalester? There were arguments on behalf of the department’s good track record for being innovative and cutting edge. Is there enough evidence of student interest – we couldn’t think of other ways to document such interest. A vote was called: Should AMS be constituted as a major, or as a track/emphasis? Three voted in favor of a major, four voted in favor of a track or emphasis. There was one abstention and one absence. The major was not approved, and we will recommend a track or emphasis. Kendrick will inform the department.
- Discussion turned to the issue of quorum at faculty meetings. We don’t want to disenfranchise any faculty, but want to base quorum on faculty in residence (based on reasonable expectation that they would be able to attend). Diane had prepared three models. We discussed pros and cons of each model, and suggestion of another hybrid model, which included part-time faculty in their second year. There was one vote for Model 1, and the rest voted for the modified hybrid model, which results in a quorum of 56. Kendrick will draft the motion.
Adjourned 6:01 p.m.
Jayne Niemi, Registrar