November 1, 2000

 

 

Academic Board Meeting

Minutes

October 31, 2000

 

BG H. S. CARTER

COL H. W. ASKINS, JR.

COL R. E. BALDWIN

COL M. A. BEBENSEE

COL J. R. BLANTON

COL C. E. CLEAVER

LTC P. B. EZELL

COL D. J. FALLON

COL A. J. FINCH

LTC J. E. GOODWIN


LTC A. W. LeCLERCQ

COL J. S. LEONARD

COL R. A. MALONEY

COL I. S. METTS, JR

COL W. B. MOORE, JR.

COL L. W. MORELAND

COL D. T. OUZTS

COL S. OZMENT

COL P. J. REMBIESA

CPT R. E. NOBLE
for COL F. W. SHEALY

LTC A. E. GURGANUS
for COL G. B. STALEY

LTC S. J. SILVER
for MAJ T. C. THOMPSON

A special meeting of the Academic Board on the issue of academic reorganization was called to order at 1520 hours. Prior to this session, BG Carter held meetings with groups of department heads. Responding to suggestions made on those occasions, he prepared a specific proposal for reorganization to present to the faculty. This meeting of the Academic Board is intended to inform the department heads of the plan and allow them some time to consider it prior to a full discussion at the next regularly scheduled Board meeting on November 14th.

BG Carter began by reviewing what the organizational structure was prior to his arrival. Several years ago, the academic departments reported to one of three designated deans. The Dean of the College of Graduate and Professional Studies worked with the departments of education, business, electrical engineering, civil engineering, health and physical education, and psychology. The Dean of Undergraduate Studies worked with the departments of history, English, modern languages, and political science/criminal justice. The Dean of Planning and Assessment biology, chemistry, math/computer science, and physics. There has also been an Associate Dean of Engineering Program Development for several years. When COL Reilly became acting head of the Department of Education, the other departments reporting to him were divided between COL Metts and COL Ozment.

Discussion of movement to a school model began some time ago. BG Poole had recommended to the President the establishment of a School of Education in AY 1998-99. When BG Carter was appointed VPAA, he asked the President to delay a decision on that recommendation. In 1999-2000, BG Carter received approval from the Board of Visitors to establish a Dean of Education position and a Dean of Business Administration position.

BG Carter presented his rationale for organization into schools headed by deans:

The goals of the school model are to:

BG Carter explained that his proposal calls for reorganization into five school:

I. School of Business Administration

Current Department of Business Administration Dean position is Robert A. Jolley Chair

II. School of Education

Current Department of Education Dean position is current Department Head position (converted last year)

III. School of Engineering

Current departments of civil engineering and electrical engineering Dean position may be the LeTellier Chair

IV. School of Humanities and Social Sciences

Current Departments of English, history, modern language, political science/criminal justice, and psychology Dean is COL Ozment

V. School of Science and Mathematics

Current Departments of biology, chemistry, mathematics/computer science, and physics Dean position is reallocated Dean of CGPS position

The only academic department not listed is health and physical education. That department could choose to join the School of Education or the School of Science and Mathematics. If the latter option were chosen, the department might wish to consider a name change to something such as Health and Kinesiology, Health and Exercise Science, or Health and Movement Science

The plan also calls for COL Metts to become Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs with responsibility for Planning and Assessment, Institutional Research, the Registrar, ITS, faculty development programs, and the Honors Program.

Reporting to the VPAA would be the Associate VPAA, five school deans, the Associate Dean of CGPS (who would continue to be responsible for administrative matters such as admissions and marketing), the military departments, the Director of the Library (including Museum).

BG Carter presented the following as illustrative of the responsibilities of academic deans:

      1. Provide leadership for the development and coordination of graduate and undergraduate programs within the unit.
      2. Present proposals for new degrees and curriculum changes from the unit.
      3. Recommend all personnel actions for the faculty and staff within the unit.
      4. Prepare and administer a budget for the unit.
      5. Recommend to the Vice President for Academic Affairs (VPAA) the appointment of new faculty.
      6. Exercise general supervision of the work of faculty, staff, and students in the unit.
      7. Be responsible for the program of academic advisement for the students in the unit.
      8. Preside at all regular and special meetings of the faculty of the unit.
      9. Serve as the medium of communication for all official business of the unit with college authorities, students, and the public (through Public Affairs).
      10. Implement the purposes of the unit as provided in the regulations of the college.
      11. Nominate candidates from the unit for degrees.
      12. Represent the unit internally and externally.
      13. Serve as an advocate for the needs of the unit.
      14. Perform other duties as assigned by the VPAA.

In terms of governance, BG Carter proposed the creation of an Academic Senate that would essentially combine the current Academic Board and Faculty Council. More specifically, the Senate would have the following composition:

The Academic Senate Vice-Chair would be a faculty member elected by the faculty members of the Academic Senate with release time equivalent to that of the current Faculty Council Chair. The Vice-Chair would serve as Chair of the Executive Committee.

Recommendations would go to the VPAA, President or BOV for action. The President or VPAA would notify the Academic Council of the disposition of any recommendation within 30 days of the receipt of the recommendation and upon action by the BOV.

The Executive Committee would be chaired by the Vice Chair of the Academic Senate and would consist of two additional faculty members from different schools and two department heads such that all five schools are represented; and two deans appointed by the VPAA. (The two Faculty Members are appointed by the Chair of the Executive Committee, then the Deans recommend department heads to the VPAA for appointment.)

The Executive Committee would be charged with guiding the actions of the Senate so as to enhance all Academic Senate activities. Specifically, the Executive Committee would:

    1. instruct the entire Senate at the beginning of each Senate term in the matters of Senate procedures and protocol. Additionally, the Executive Committee shall meet separately with all first-time senators at the beginning of each Senate term to discuss the philosophy and activities of the Academic Senate at The Citadel.
    2. appoint a parliamentarian for each Senate term, if requested by presiding officer. This parliamentarian may be chosen from any member of the college community. This individual will be confirmed by a majority vote of the Senate. This individual will counsel the presiding officer regarding matters of parliamentary procedure.
    3. review the report of the Senate librarian/secretary prior to its distribution to the faculty as a means of expediting all Senate activities.
    4. receive, prior to the construction of each Senate’s agenda, all proposed agenda items. The Chair of the Executive Committee shall advise the VPAA regarding the inclusion of these items on the agenda.
    5. create and appoint members to ad hoc committees. In general, members will be chosen to ensure representation from across the college community. The Executive Committee will solicit interest for any nomination or appointment to an ad hoc committee. However, in some cases qualifications for committee membership will accrue directly from the nature of the committee activity and the interest and talents of certain individuals.
    6. ensure that each ad hoc committee has a specific charge that outlines measurable objectives for the committee and time constraints for the accomplishment of these objectives.
    7. meet at least once a session with the Chair of each ad hoc committee to discuss the status of its activities and meet with the Chair of any standing committee at the request of the Executive Committee’s Chair. The Executive Committee will review these activities and provide advice and assistance to facilitate the successful completion of these committees’ tasks.
    8. ensure that each ad hoc committee submits to the Executive Committee a written final report summarizing its activities. These reports will be provided to the Senate for review and action, as needed.

The Academic Senate could override the decision of the SEC by a majority vote of those present at the Academic Senate meeting.

BG Carter said he further envisions the administration and faculty carrying out their work through two college councils and a streamlined set of standing college committees:

Graduate Council (Chair would be VPAA)
Programs and Curriculum Committee (includes Assessment)
Graduate Recruitment and Admissions Committee
Graduate Faculty Committee
Undergraduate Council (Chair would be Dean of Humanities and Social Sciences)
Programs and Curriculum Committee
Undergraduate Recruitment and Admissions Committee
Curriculum Assessment Committee
Athletic Advisory Committee
Campus Affairs Committee
Computer Services Advisory Committee
Faculty Development Committee
Faculty Tenure and Promotion Committee (Reports directly to VPAA)
Honors and Awards Committee
Library Services Advisory Committee
Student Affairs Committee
Research/Scholarship Committee

At the conclusion of his presentation, BG Carter entertained questions.

COL Rembiesa expressed concern about larger departments having more representation in the Academic Senate than smaller ones. It was pointed out that this is true now on Faculty Council.

COL Finch asked about the role of the Dean of Women. BG Carter explained that the administration hopes to be relieved of the requirement to have someone with that title. Few institutions have a Dean of Women now, and those that do assign the position to Student Activities. If the legal requirement continues, COL Ozment will retain the title or someone else will be selected.

COL Cleaver questioned the wisdom of the VPAA chairing the Academic Senate since that body will also report to the VPAA. BG Carter said he was open to other alternatives.

COL Moreland commented on the large size of the Academic Senate and wondered if it might be unwieldy. BG Carter said that in his experience a Senate of this size worked well and allowed for meaningful discussion.

COL Moreland also asked for a prediction of the level of support for the reorganization plan from the President and the Board of Visitors. BG Carter replied that the President is very supportive of deans and schools. He said he has not yet raised the issue with members of the BOV but would begin discussing it after the entire academic community has had an opportunity to learn about it and exchange ideas. He indicated that he does not anticipate significant BOV opposition if the plan has strong campus support.

In response to LTC LeClercq’s inquiry about the role of the department head in the new scheme, BG Carter said that the department head’s role would remain the same.

LTC Goodwin asked about the cost of the reorganization. BG Carter said the costs would be minimal because we are currently able to take advantage of several openings at the unit head level and have been given permission to convert a couple of vacant chair positions to dean positions.

COL Rembiesa asked for more details about how the College of Graduate and Professional Studies would be run. BG Carter emphasized that the school deans would be responsible for programs at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. The Associate Dean of CGPS would continue to handle admissions, recruiting, marketing, etc.

BG offered to distribute copies of his slides and suggested that department heads plan to discuss the proposal at the November Academic Board meeting.

The meeting was adjourned at 1620 hours.

Submitted by

 

Suzanne Ozment