EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

2.     Approve the minutes from the April 7, 2011 meeting

3.     Acalog Catalog and Curriculum Software – Bruce Bowen

4.     Campus Update – Mike Vaughan

5.     Meeting Schedule for 2011-12
        Committee Chairs Luncheon September 15 at 12:30

6.     Committee Membership Changes

CRAO - Replace Carol Naylor, HP with Collette Renstrom

SBBFP - Jeff Ward replaces David Ferro, COAST

ARCC - Mary Wrenn replaces Eric Swedin, B&E

Gen Ed - Doris Geide-Stevenson replaces Mary Wrenn, B&E

7.     Faculty Senate Changes
        Michael Hernandez (Science), and Stephen Francis (S&BS) on sabbatical fall

8.     Draft Committee Charges

Academic Resources and Computing – Stephen Hill
Admissions, Standards, and Student Affairs – Shelly Costley
Appointment, Promotion, Academic Freedom, and Tenure – Brian Rague
Constitutional Review, Apportionment, and Organization – Brian Rague
Curriculum – Colin Inglefield
Environmental Issues Committee – Ed Hahn
General Education Improvement & Assessment – Michelle More
Honorary Degree – Patti Cost
Research, Scholarship, and Professional Growth – Patti Cost
Salary, Benefits, Budget, and Fiscal Planning – Colleen Garside
Teaching, Learning, and Assessment – Julie Buck

9.     Other Items

MINUTES

PRESENT
Julie Buck, Patricia Cost, Shelly Costley, Colleen Garside, Ed Hahn, Stephen Hill, Colin Inglefield, Michelle More, Brian Rague, Michael Vaughan, Kay Brown, Secretary

GUESTS
Bruce Bowen, Mark Simpson

MINUTES
Motion to approve the minutes from the April 7, 2011 Executive Committee meeting.
The minutes were approved.

ACALOG
The University issued an RFP in the Spring for software to manage an electronic catalog. The catalog software will be purchased through Digital Architecture. Embedded within the software for the electronic catalog is a program for curriculum management (starting with curriculum submissions by faculty members, routing the proposal through the process until it is entered into the catalog and into Cat Tracks).

Demonstration of Curriculum Management through Acalog

• Version Auditing - Designed to support certain elements of the curriculum change process.

• Supports an unlimited number of users in the system (managers who are super users, editors who have limited editorial rights in the system, and reviewers who have "read only" access in the system. The system can support any number of custom groups, i.e. Deans, department chairs, department committees, university committees, Senate, Provost, etc. Routing takes place where people can approve, comment on, or reject the change.

• Word documents can be imported into the system.

• Audit trail that captures the original item entered in the system and all changes made.

• Proposals are routed to departments and committees.

• A summary of each proposal shows the entire history (approvals, edits, and comments).

• Once final approval takes place the system prevents any further action on that item.

Questions

• When do the changes go live? The date to publish the new version of the catalog will be determined by the university. If a course is not active it will not appear in the catalog.

• Course proposal forms would be developed by Weber State, however, faculty could begin the process by creating a new course in Acalog without a course proposal form. The system allows for specific fields to be added.

• Supporting Documentation - Can documents be attached? Acalog is flexible. Documents can be attached.

• Time investment to learn this tool? Basic training takes two hours.

• Is there a search feature? Yes, within the course proposals and the gateway.

• Archive Feature - As long as the catalog is in the system everything associated with the approval process remains with that catalog.

CAMPUS UPDATE – Michael Vaughan Reporting

The Northwest Association has required every institution to develop core themes that are associated with the mission of the university. The core themes developed by the Planning Council are: Access, Learning and Community. Northwest also requires objectives associated with each core theme and indicators for each of the objectives.

The Northwest accreditation process has moved from one large report every ten years to multiple reports. Weber State will do a report every year for the next four years as part of the new accreditation review.

Online Catalog - Many institutions have gone to an online catalog. The Acalog program has capability to manage curriculum workflow. The curriculum process is not linked to the online catalog in such a way that you have to use it.

Tenure and Promotion - The tenure and promotion process is very tightly structured, when it ends, when candidates have to have their file ready for review, what type of information goes into a candidates file, removing information from a file, etc.

Some departments have made the tenure and promotion process an ad hoc paperless process. Without any structure committee members pass along Word documents. This creates problems.

CALENDAR
The Executive Committee meeting schedule was distributed.

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP
Constitutional Review, Apportionment and Organization - Replace Carol Naylor witH Collette Renstrom
Salary, Benefits, Budget & Fiscal Planning - Jeff Ward replaces David Ferro, COAST
Academic Resources & Computing - Need a replacement for Mary Wrenn, B&E. Stephen Hill will look for a replacement.
General Education & Improvement & Assessment - Doris Geide-Stevenson replaces Mary Wrenn, B&E

Senate replacements are needed for Michael Hernandez and Stephen Francis. The colleges are in the process of holding elections.

CHARGES
Charges should be prioritized. Deadline dates are helpful. Rather than stating in a charge that the committee "examine" and item, the charge could state, "report or make a recommendation."

ACADEMIC RESOURCES AND COMPUTING – Stephen Hill

Charges 6, 9, and 11 could be consolidated.

14. 1. Examine changes to faculty and staff email. What changes to the email system do faculty/staff wish to see and what features are desired? How well will any proposed changes integrate with the increasing number of mobile devices (smartphones, tablets, etc.) that are being used on campus? (Fall Semester)

1. 2 Allocate ARCC resources including Dee Family Technology Grant funds, using consistent, objective, fair, and reasonable criteria. Examine recent changes in the Dee Technology endowment and modify processes as appropriate so that they are consistent with the grant.

A. Review funding criteria and procedures for ARCC for possible revision or clarification purposes. (December deadline)

B. Continue to develop funding criteria for and advertisement of the Dee Family Technology Grant.

4. 3 Continue to improve the means of submitting proposals and decreasing the amount of paperwork. Evaluate opportunities for "paperless" workflows campus-wide.

2. 4 Assess faculty and student computer needs, solicit faculty input, and lobby for the faculty’s computer-related interests.

3. 5 Review (with computing support) standards and policies for hardware and software purchases.

5. 6 Monitor the expenditures of all ARCC funds, including those supported through WSUSA funding.

6. 7 Maintain close communication with other computer resource entities on campus, including CE and IT online instruction. (Eliminate/merge with Charge 9?)

7. 8 Be represented on the IT Council and IT Steering Committee, and routinely invite directors to summarize status of new projects and ongoing IT/CE support.

8. 9 Coordinate faculty representation on other IT related committees.

9. 10 Improve communication between faculty, IT/CE, and administration regarding technology issues and advise said bodies of faculty needs. Pay particular attention to the impact of the reorganization of the IT division on working relationships with faculty and staff.

10. 11 Sponsor a faculty/staff IT Users Group to share information, ideas, and solutions regarding the use of technology at Weber State. (No change needed, Was this done in previous years? If so, what were the outcomes?)

11. 12 Continue to function as a nexus of information regarding IT issues between faculty, staff, and students, acting in an advisory capacity, and investigate its position as a decision making body. (Eliminate/merge with Charges 6 and 9?)

12. 13 Research ways to strengthen academic computing, specifically in the areas of visualization, simulation, and scientific analysis. Are there faculty research opportunities that may be unique to Weber State’s academic computing environment?

13. 14 Examine product implementations in computer labs to determine if some products could be used on a campus-wide basis.

ADMISSIONS, STANDARDS & STUDENT AFFAIRS – Shelly Costley

1. Examine and propose modifications to policies governing dual majors in accordance with the new BA/BS requirements.

2. Examine and propose modifications to policies governing second degrees consistent with the new BA/BS requirements.

3. Review the PPM for policies that may be out of date or obsolete.

4. Review PPM 4-21a, III, B in regards to equivalency of transferred courses.

5. Recommend changes to 4-2.II.a.1 to add an exception to the first sentence. (Fall? Spring?)

6. Investigate and propose policy regarding transferability of remedial courses and applying remedial courses towards residency requirements. (What was the original intent of this charge?)

APPOINTMENT, PROMOTION, ACADEMIC FREEDOM & TENURE – Brian Rague

1. When delivered to the committee, review the intellectual policy draft developed by Richard Hill to determine the impact to faculty scholarship and research. If needed, put in place a new intellectual property policy.

2. To investigate the viability of formal policies for dean and department chair term limits, formulate a procedure to implement term limits for deans and department chairs. Delineate the pros and cons of term limits when applied to deans and department chairs.

3. Formulate a change to policy regarding dismissal of tenure track faculty during the probationary period. based on recommendations submitted by the 2010-2011 APAFT committee (Charge 3, PPM 8-20D and 9-17A. Specifically, develop a written policy to address the cases in which a candidate receives an unsatisfactory progress toward tenure in an interim review.

5.  4 Review recommendations made by 2010-2011 APAFT committee regarding the current survey instrument used to evaluate academic deans in light of any changes made through charge 5 above. Specifically, consider moving forward on a recommendation that the Executive Committee appoint an ad hoc task force to revise the current instrument.

4. 5 Subsequent to revision of the survey instrument described in charge 4, update PPM 1-17, Selection and Evaluation of Academic Deans, per the recommendations submitted by the 2010-2011 APAFT committee (Charges 4, 6, 7). Specifically, PPM 1-17 should include:

• Clear delineation between the initial appointment, interim two-year review, and evaluation for reappointment.
• A minimum approval rating in the Faculty Survey should be established for first and subsequent reappointments.
• Consequences of the interim review and reappointment evaluation must be made clear, for example, in salary increases, terms or reappointment, etc.

6. Report on possible revisions of college and departmental policy regarding terminal degree exceptions for promotion and tenure.

CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW, APPORTIONMENT & ORGANIZATION – Brian Rague

1. Calculate apportionment for Faculty Senate representation using the Hamilton Method and present the apportionment figures to the Faculty Senate during Fall Semester. (November deadline).

2. Research questions and make recommendations that are brought to the attention of the CRAO Committee.

3. Write a policy or modify the existing policy with regard to timely and suitable consultation and notification of the faculty when it is deemed necessary to temporarily suspend a policy in the PPM. (passed EC 3/4/2010 B Carried forward)

Charges stemming from item #3:

• What statutory, constitutional or rule authority governs the suspension of a policy under the PPM?
• What authority does faculty have to assert themselves in the suspension process of the administration and/or Board of Trustees?
• What procedure would allow for the most productive discussion and decision making process in determining wheter to suspend a PPM policy?

4. Establish the need for a specific policy prohibiting ballot voting in the Faculty Senate. Faculty concerns center on the principle that faculty senate is predicated as a representative government.

5. Review PPM for non-substantive terminology changes such as department name changes, etc.

6. Review PPM policies (20 years or older) to identify possible action. (Time permitting)

CURRICULUM COMMITTEE – Colin Inglefield

1. Review and approve curriculum and program proposals.

2. Continue to conduct workshops on an as-needed basis with college curriculum committee chairs to acquaint them with curriculum procedures.

3. Develop a new approval form for courses to satisfy the diversity requirement using criteria approved by Faculty Senate.

4. Report to the faculty senate how the proposed switch to an electronic catalog curriculum workflow would affect the operations of the curriculum committee. Make recommendations.

5. Identify a process where learning objectives are communicate to students, i.e. published online or in the syllabus.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES - Ed Hahn

1. Continue organizing the EIC’s speaker, film, and discussion series.

2. Keeping the EIC website up-to-date and producing four issues of a newsletter distributed through a campus list-serv.

3. Working with Student Affairs and Student Government to gather support for including a student sustainability fee into the student fee structure (sustainability fees are assessed at most large universities now, including the U of Utah and Utah State) that will fund student staff positions, sustainability initiatives and more.

4. Defining and approving the General Curriculum-Focused Sustainability definition, the Specific Sustainability Curriculum definition, and the Checklist for Sustainability Curriculum Designation for the STARS (Sustainability Tracking and Rating System) program to which WSU has subscribed. These definitions apply only to the STARS program and are used for STARS purposes only. (Fall)

5. Considering ways to better incorporate sustainability into the curriculum in order to help WSU achieve a Bronze rating from the STARS program. Currently, across the three STARS categories, Planning & Administration earns 22 points, Operations earns 28 points, but Education and Research only earns 6.5 points. To improve, we need to consider how to improve the following 5 categories:

• Incentives for faculty to develop sustainability courses
• Student sustainability educator's program (i.e. eco-peers)
• A completed student outreach campaign that produces positive results (i.e. participate in RecyleMania and increase our recycling rate as a result)
• Incorporate sustainability into new student orientation.
• Conduct a sustainability literacy assessment of our students.

6. Coordinating with the WSU Student Environmental Club to increase student involvement and awareness with environmentally-and sustainability-related issues.

7. Partnering with campus organizations to offer faculty education workshops on the topic of sustainability. Explore ideas and funding sources for a ‘sustainability in the curriculum’ faculty retreat in 2012.

8. Exploring opportunities to provide environmentally-themed outreach programs to local schools.

9. Exploring best practices in office power conservation: power strips, campus campaigns, new software programs that reduce desktop computer electricity use, etc.

10. Taking the lead to explore options to reduce WSU’s paper inundation—how can we reduce the amount of flyers and notices sent through campus mail?

11. Working with Facilities Management to explore ‘greener" ways to manage campus lawns and create more xeriscaped areas.

12. Ensuring the recycling signage and the "Turn Your Key: Be Idle Free" signage is installed in fall 2011.

13. Assisting in hosting the Northern Utah Recycling Symposium in March 2012.

14. Continuing to build partnerships with student organizations, the WSU Outdoor Program, alumni, the City of Ogden, other universities statewide, the Teaching and Learning Forum, and more.

GENERAL EDUCATION IMPROVEMENT & ASSESSMENT – Michele More

1. In consultation with WSU’s deans and department chairs, members of the GEIAC will identify faculty members to serve on the newly established General Education Area Committees (approved by Faculty Senate on March 24, 2011): Composition; American Institutions, Quantitative Literacy; Computer & Information Literacy; Humanities; Creative Arts; Social Sciences; Physical Sciences; Life Sciences. (October 2011 deadline)

2. The GEIAC will guide the GE Area Committees as they develop a work plan to systematically collect and analyze assessment data and make recommendations for the improvement of General Education courses in their area. (Work plans due January 2012)

The GE Area Committees will begin to implement their various assessment plans during Spring Semester 2012. Their first reports to the GEIAC will be due in October 2012. The GEIAC will provide a summary report to the Faculty Senate in November 2012.

3. Develop a set of criteria to be used by the Curriculum Committee to review existing Diversity (DV) courses and to approve new Diversity (DV) courses. (November 2011 deadline; DV courses are scheduled to undergo review during the 2012-13 academic year)

4. Work with the Curriculum Committee, as needed, to evaluate the existing General Education courses that will undergo review during the 2011-12 academic year. Based on the results of the review process, and in consultation with the appropriate GE Area Committee, recommend clarifications and/or modifications of mission statements and learning outcomes. (as needed/ongoing)

5. Explore the Development of distinct/separate learning outcomes for the Creative Arts (CA) and Humanities (HU) breadth areas. (March 2012 deadline)

HONORARY DEGREE – Patti Cost

1. Meet separately and early as the faculty portion of the committee to discuss representing in a unified manner the constituent needs and interests of the faculty in the deliberation of the larger committee.

2. Ensure faculty involvement in the nomination and selection of candidates for honorary degrees and for commencement speakers through maintaining the important voice of the faculty and the Faculty Senate as a major force on the institutional committee.

3. Consider ways to encourage more nominations from faculty for honorary degrees.

4. Encourage the selection of at least one honorary degree recipient each year who has made an outstanding academic contribution to higher education, preferably a retired WSU faculty member or past faculty member who has left Weber State University. Current faculty members are not eligible.

5. Work to achieve a representation of gender and ethnicity among degree recipients and ensure that all recipients are of stature to enhance the image of Weber State University.

6. See that the criteria for honorary degrees are considered , so that the understandable desire of the administration to cultivate donors and potential donors does not overwhelm the deliberations and pass over otherwise worthy candidates.

7. Provide the larger committee with a way to carry forward information so next year’s committee can benefit from work done this year.

RSPG RESEARCH, SCHOLARSHIP & PROFESSIONAL GROWTH – Patti Cost

1. Continue to issue requests for proposals (RFPs) for Research and Instructional Improvement grants, and Hemingway Vitality, Excellence and Collaborative awards, and review the proposals in a timely manner. 2. Continue to coordinate deadlines for submission of proposals with the chairs of the Institutional Review Board and the Animal Care and Use Committee.

3. Review and update as needed the proposal guidelines. Clarify and report the criteria for awarding the grant. Explore ways to simplify the process and broaden the criteria.

4. Provide feedback to authors why proposals were not funded.

5. Continue efforts to publicize the committee’s activities. Seek ways to broaden participation campus wide including adjunct faculty. Explore opportunities to disseminate information about the funded projects, including workshops, in order to provide consistent information and feedback to potential applicants.

6. Work with the Teaching, Learning and Assessment Committee to find non-monetary ways to promote and recognize faculty research and scholarship.

7. Work with the Teaching, Learning and Assessment Committee to help faculty identify new methods of scholarship.

8. Keep in communication and continue to cooperate and coordinate with OUR (Office of Undergraduate Research), CIC (Community Involvement), Hall family, and ARCC (Academic Resources and Computing Committee).

9. Continue to coordinate with OUR to provide faculty with funding for research assistants.

SALARY, BENEFITS, BUDGET & FISCAL PLANNING – Colleen Garside

1. Examine the dollar amounts of equity and merit adjustments each year.

2. Revisit sabbatical leave policy (definition of and current practice), and make recommendations. Is the way sabbaticals are currently administered fair across colleges? Would we be better served by centralizing sabbatical leave administration? Should policies be developed to prioritize sabbatical leave requests? for a) newer faculty, b) more productive faculty, c) faculty whose prior sabbaticals have resulted in productive results, or d) faculty with longer lapsed time since last sabbatical? Should teaching of on-line and overload courses be precluded for faculty on sabbatical leaves? Should there be a policy guiding outside compensation for those on sabbatical?

3. Review campus salary levels using CUPA data, turnover data, and data from regional peer institutions.

4. Monitor Report on the impact of the sick and family leave policy for faculty (PPM 3-21a).

5. Review the decisions to switch health care providers and its impact on faculty.

6. Examine salary options for compensation increases and prioritize recommendations.

7. Per recommendation from the prior Salary committee, work in conjunction with administration and colleges to arrive at specific faculty salary increase amounts commensurate with the level of degree attained from an accredited body.

Distribution of overload hours given colleges by Continuing Education was discussed as a possible charge.

TEACHING, LEARNING & ASSESSMENT – Julie Buck

1. Continue to provide faculty development of teaching and learning through a range of established forums and opportunities yet to be created. These may include, but are not limited to the following:

• Sponsor a Teaching & Learning Symposium in conjunction with the Office of Academic Affairs;
• Sponsor the Last Lecture and Faculty Forum in conjunction with the Office of Academic Affairs and RSPG;
• Sponsor the annual New Faculty Retreat;
• Sponsor and promote book discussion groups, small working collaborations, mentoring networks, workshops, and retreats.

2. Experiment with new forms of professional development to expand Teaching and Learning Forum activities (e.g., discussion groups), promote more participation across campus, and engage faculty in multiple ways.

3. Explore ways to increase participation in all TLA sponsored events and further promote professional development in teaching and learning.

4. Support efforts of individual faculty, departments, and other groups in experimenting with pedagogical innovation, curriculum design, and assessment and evaluation.

5. Work with various campus entities (OUR, CIC, etc.) to help faculty identify new methods of scholarship.

6. Work with other campus entities (e.g., WSU Online) to further support adjunct faculty.

7. Work with the Office of Undergraduate Research to insure faculty involvement in student research and faculty help with the upcoming National Conference on Undergraduate Research that will be held at Weber State University in March 2012.

NEXT MEETING
The next Executive Committee meeting will be Thursday, September

ADJOURN
Lunch was served. The meeting adjourned at 1:30 p.m.