Present:	Karen Brucks, Eduardo Douglas, Glen Fredlund, Peter Geissinger, Joyce Kirk, Kris Ruggiero
Excused:	Sukanya Banerjee, Pat Kissinger, Daad Saffarini, Kathleen Wheatley
Guests:	Connie Jo, Richard Meadows, Kim Romenesko

1. Call to Order -- The chair, Peter Geissinger, called the meeting to order at 9:35 a.m. in Holton 241.
2. Procedural Matters - Spring meeting schedule. The following dates, at 9:30 a.m., were approved: January 28, February 25, March 24, April 14, and May 5.
3. Automatic Consent
   1. Approval of Minutes #4, 2007-2008 (December 4, 2007) - Joyce Kirk asked that a sentence be added at the bottom of the first paragraph under "IV. A Old Business" indicating that Eduardo said "no no no" in response to Joyce's suggestion that he look for articles, and that they both subsequently agreed to look for information. The committee approved the amendment. The minutes were approved as amended.

      It was moved, seconded, and approved to suspend the agenda for Dean Meadows

      Richard had three things to discuss with the APGC. The first was the review and evaluation of UWM Centers by the APBC. Richard distributed a memorandum that had been sent to Center Directors (a copy of which is attached to the original of these minutes) and indicated that he is interested in getting the APGC's feedback about the self-evaluation reports. The reports eventually will be reviewed by the campus APBC. Richard said he will have the reports copied and distributed to members of the APGC.

      The second item for discussion was the Master Planning Project. Richard is a member of the Liberal Arts/Professions subcommittee. He handed out to the committee a questionnaire that was distributed recently to departments (a copy of which is attached to the original of these minutes). The questionnaire asks about academic planning over the next 5-10 years. Richard thought the questionnaire would have been more useful if it had one more level of detail (more "flesh on the bone"). He suggested that departments that have complicated research groups (or other kinds of groups) might want to think about having each group complete the questionnaire so that all constituents are heard. The questionnaire will create a mountain of data. One of the important questions has to do with how priorities will be established. Richard thinks the College will have some say in setting priorities, but campus will likely have the final say. Our needs, hopes, and aspirations need to be well documented.

      Finally, Richard provided an update on cluster hires, DIN, WIBIT, and undergraduate research proposals. Around 30 proposals for cluster hires were submitted; half or a little more came from L&S. L&S also was well represented with undergraduate research proposals. Again, over half were from L&S. Seven or eight WIBIT proposals were submitted to campus; all but one came from L&S. Award decisions should be made by the end of the week or early next week. There is discussion with the Graduate School about the possibility of counting PAs and Fellows, in addition to RAs, to determine each department's share of the DIN money for graduate student support. The decision on how best to use this money will be made next week.

      Richard left the meeting. Peter Geissinger provided committee members with a hand-out he had created that summarizes key points regarding the Master Planning Process (a copy is attached to the original of these minutes), based upon his involvement with the Liberal Arts and Professions Subcommittee. He said the members of the subcommittee were concerned about how the data collected from the questionnaire would be handled. The members argued that they should be able to review the data at some point so that they can suggest priorities or provide meaningful feedback to the consultants. After discussing Peter's document in detail, committee members charged him with drafting a motion listing the APGC's concerns about the master planning process to be sent to the university committee and the Provost.

   Connie Jo requested that the committee suspend the agenda to discuss a proposal to change the charter of the APGC committee. The committee agreed to do so.

   It was moved and seconded to recommend to the Faculty approval of the recommendation of AP&GC to amend its charter.

   The motion was approved.

4. Old Business
   1. Spousal and Target-of-Opportunity Hiring - The committee asked Connie and Kim to invite the following chairpersons to the next meeting to discuss their experiences with spousal and target-of-opportunity hiring: Bob Jeske (Anthropology), Craig Sandgren (Biological Sciences), and Andy Martin (English).
   2. Budget Discussion - postponed to next meeting
   3. Discussion of the Master Planning Process - see above
5. Adjournment - The meeting adjourned at 11:00 a.m.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Kim Romenesko
Senior Administrative Program Specialist
Letters and Science Administration

 

Distribution: Dean G. Richard Meadows
Associate Deans Gajdardziska-Josifovska, O'Bryan, Schuster, Swain
Assistant Deans Weslow, Jo
Secretary of the University

Minutes#5, 2007-08.apgc