University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
College of Letters and Science
1999-2000
Committee On Committees
Meeting: Wednesday, September 22, 2000
Holton Hall 241
Minutes No. 1
| Present: |
Martha Carlin, Mary K Casey, James Coggins, Reinhold Hutz, Connie Jo (ex officio), Campbell Tatham |
| Absent: |
Kristin Espinosa |
| Guest: |
Celi Jeske |
- Call to Order - The Chair, Cam Tatham, called the meeting to order at 10:03 a.m. in HLT 241.
- Automatic Consent
- Minutes #3, 1999-2000 Committee Year (March 10, 2000) were approved as submitted.
- The Annual Report for 1999-2000 was approved as submitted.
- Procedural Matters
- Review Charter - Connie Jo briefly discussed some of the Committee's functions, particularly the duty of reviewing committees. No committees are scheduled for review this year, though review of the Affirmative Action Advisory Committee is being continued from the previous year.
- Recommend Parliamentarian to the Dean - The Committee recommends that David Mulroy serve as parliamentarian if he is willing to do so.
- Meeting Schedule - The Committee members agreed to meet according to the same schedule as it has followed in the past few years, setting meetings whenever appropriate business arises.
- Old Business
- Affirmative Action Advisory Committee - Connie reported that, prior to the CoC's review, the AAAC had not met in a number of years. During the review, AAAC members decided to try to reactivate the committee. The one-year membership term was a problem because the committee had no continuity of membership from year to year. Last academic year, the faculty changed the term of committee members to three-year (staggered) terms. Reinhold Hutz is on the committee this year. He agreed to "light a fire" under the group to meet soon. Connie will notify Cam of any members whose fall schedules have not been received.
- Attendance at Faculty Meetings - The faculty approved a policy asking that each department assign a representative to attend the faculty meeting and to report back to the department. Cam will send out a notice to departments, reminding them of this policy. The members discussed the long time lag between meetings and the impact on proposals that had to wait for faculty action before moving on to the next level of review. Members agreed that they would call additional meetings if business arrived that required prompt action. Connie was asked to apprise the Chair of matters coming before the Course and Curriculum and the Graduate Program Committees.
- New Business
- Faculty Meeting - November 2 was selected as the date of the first faculty meeting.
- Agenda Items - The draft agenda was approved unanimously, with a minor change and correction. Committee members agreed that any additional annual reports could be added to the agenda. If other program proposals were received, Connie will contact the member via email for their views on adding those items to the agenda. The Chair asked that copies of the proposed grievance policy and any new items received be sent to Committee members.
- Nominations Process - Members agreed to use the same forms that the Committee used in the past as well as to follow the same timetable.
- College Approval Matrix - Connie reported that the all-University approval matrix, on which the new College approval matrix was based, had been changed recently by the Faculty Senate. She asked if a revision of the College matrix should be done to mirror the format of the all-University matrix and, if so, whether or not the revised matrix had to go to the faculty for approval. Committee members agreed that the College matrix should be revised and circulated to the members via email. If approved, it should be added as the first item of new business on the faculty meeting agenda.
- Distinguished Professor Nominations - The Dean's request for advice on how the College faculty should be involved in the process of making recommendations for distinguished professorships was discussed. Jim Coggins described a case from last year that was not approved. Apparently, there are no written policies regarding the awarding of this title. The University-level Distinguished Professors Committee (an uncodified committee comprised of anyone carrying the title) vote whether or not another faculty member should be admitted to their rank. Currently, proposals are sent from the department to the Dean, then to the Graduate School, followed by the DP Committee. The Dean does not feel comfortable approving a nomination without any faculty review or input. Committee members agreed that it is premature to talk about how the College's role in the process should be handled; what is needed is a codified set of University-wide policies and procedures for this process. Members felt that the Faculty Senate should approve this process. Cam and Connie will draft a letter to the University Committee, raising this issue and suggesting that we look at policies on other campuses for models.
- Adjournment - The meeting was adjourned at 10:48 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Connie Jo
Secretary to the L&S Faculty
cc: Dean Marshall Goodman
Associate Deans R. Meadows, T. O'Bryan, C. Schuster, D. Van Wynsberghe
Assistant Deans W. Horstman, P. Kissinger, E. Olfe
Minutes #1.coc
|
·