Faculty Meeting Minutes
April 5, 2011
Dickey Hall Auditorium
Ivory V. Nelson Ph.D., President, Presiding
Dr. Nelson called the meeting to order at 4:05 PM.
I. Report from the Student Government Association: None.
II. Report of the President: Dr. Ivory V. Nelson.
Dr. Nelson’s report was based upon the following six documents:
A. Assessment Monitoring Report(s) April 26-29, 2011
B. Report on MSCHE Standard 14: Assessment of Student Learning as of March 31, 2011 (37 Academic Programs)
C. [Written] Statement by Ivory V. Nelson, Ph.D., President, Lincoln University to Senate Appropriations Committee, March 16, 2011, 1 p.m. , The Honorable Jake Corman, Chairman [and] House Appropriations Committee, March 28, 2011, 10:30 a.m., The Honorable William F. Adolph, Jr., Chairman.
D. 2011-2012 Operational Budget Request to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania [Summary Sheet]
E. Lincoln University Facts [Sheet]
F. Lincoln University 1998/99-2009/10 Operating Budget Variance Analysis
Dr. Nelson in the first handout pointed out the importance of all faculty members needed to present on campus from Tuesday April 26 through Friday April 29 to work on finalizing their departments [programs] in an “established format” to their Deans the 2009-10 and 2010-11 Assessment plans, monitoring report (in defined format) and all documentation to support assessment activities.
The second handout indicated the status of standard 14: Assessment of Student Learning as of March 31, 2011 for the 37 academic programs. 22 programs met the standard and 15 were still under review.
Dr. Nelson in his written statement to the appropriations committees of the state legislature address the issue of the proposed 6.811 million dollar budget cut by the Governor Tom Corbett in his budget address of March 8, 2011 on Lincoln University. He stress with inflation, no tuition and fee increase and same base enrollment the budget cut is actually 8.7 million dollar cut in reality. He went over this statement very carefully with the faculty. We are still figuring out how to deal with cut. We are hopeful that the governor’s proposed cut is the initial figure in a long negotiation between the governor and the legislature and we are hopeful that this budget cut will be less severe when the final state budget is adopted. There is really no magic solution to deal with this situation and it will take some combination of things: e.g.: tuition and fees increase, cutback in salaries and benefits, and increase in withdrawal of funds from the endowment.
Faculty can request a full copy of the 2011-2012 Operational Budget Request to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania from the President’s Office.
On the Budget Variance Analysis Dr. Nelson reported that we are required to depreciate buildings over a thirty year period and equipment over a five year period. He also pointed out the increase in Maintenance and Repair costs as new and renovated buildings come aboard.
III. Action Items
A. Approval of Minutes from the March 8, 2011.
The minutes were approved with several nays. Dr. Susan Safford expressed her concern that there was too much commentary in the minutes. Dr. Flint suggested that the Faculty By-Laws Committee, the Parliamentarian, and the Faculty Secretary will meet to discuss what should actually be in the faculty meeting minutes.
B. Recommendation from the Educational Policies Committee: Dr. James DeBoy
Dr. DeBoy presented on behalf of the committee the following proposed modification to last month’s Grade Change policy (Item 3: Arbitrariness):
Arbitrariness: At the discretion of the chair based upon a careful review of course work and syllabus by the chair, the submitted grade may be changed by the chair if:
(a) The grade is deemed to be outside the accepted academic norm and
(b) The senior Faculty member serving on the Educational Policies Committee (and is not in the affected School) agrees with the decision.
(As written, the EPC member would have to agree with the grade change for it to be forwarded to the School Dean; as in all grade changes, the dean of the affected school must also agree/approve – See Grade Correction form).
The rationale for this proposal: Given the serious nature of this matter (academic integrity/faculty professionalism), the steps to override any Faculty member’s grade submission must be scrupulous. The addition of the EPC member underscores the gravity of this procedure.
At the meeting there was extensive discussion over why we need this policy of Arbitrariness and that some express a concern that this process will make it more difficult for students who appeal their grade. Some of the faculty wanted to know which colleges and universities where there are policies of Arbitrariness. After a period of time, Mr. Bryson moved to Table the motion. The motion to Table was seconded and adopted by voice vote.
C. Recommendations from the Educational Policies Committee: Dr. Sally Monsilovich
Dr. Monsilovich moved the approval of two new courses from the Masters of Human Services Program:
1. Counseling Adolescents for the Human Services Professional
2. Sexuality Counseling and Consultation in Human Services.
These two courses will strengthen the counseling component of the Human Services Programs. They cited the need for these counseling courses to be included in our program by the various licensing state boards for the practice of Social Work. The Masters program designed these courses to match the requirements of the Pennsylvania State Board of Social Workers, Marriage and Family Therapists and Professional Counseling in order to satisfy the academic requirements to take the exam to practice in Pennsylvania as a Licensed Professional Counselor.
The courses were approved by the faculty.
3. Dr. Monsilovich then move for the approval of a new course in Psychology: Developmental Psychology.
The department cited a need for course that studies the biological, psychological and the social development of humans from birth to death. The current Psychology 307 course covers from childhood to adulthood only. It is hope that eventually this new course will replace PSY 307.
Some faculty expressed a concern that the complete syllabus for this course was not available for their consideration. They pointed out that there was no allocation of grades was given between: exams, final exam, web page, and the research paper. This information was given to the full Committee which decided to strip it out for the full faculty because the grade allocation will varied with each instructor in the future.
The course was approved by the faculty.
Dr. Monsilovich reminded faculty that at the December faculty meeting the Curriculum Committee distributed a template of the 19 items require to be in a syllabus and that that template in also now available on TLE website.
D. Recommendation from the Nominations Committee: Dr. Siddique
Dr. Siddique reported the slate from the Nominations Committee was posted on the website on March 23, 2011 and that he failed to get on the agenda because of he was late turning in his request. The faculty agreed to add this item to the agenda.
The slate as recommended by the Committee was approved as submitted:
The slate as follows:
• Assessment: Dr. Triesner, Dr. Millette, Prof. Donahue
• Athletics: Prof. Whitingham
• Curriculum: Dr. Royer, Prof. Chapp
• Educational Policies: Dr. Millette, Dr. Crittenden
• Faculty By-Laws: Dr. DiFilippo
• Faculty Development: Dr. George-Swayze, Dr. Ihejirika
• Graduate Studies: Dr. Surplus
• Honorary Degree: [Replaced already.]
• Honors & Award: [Replaced already.]
• Judicial Review: Dr. Siddique
• Juridical Review: Dr. Haimbodi
• Lectures & Recitals: [Already replaced.]
• Library: Prof. Chapp, Dr. Stine
• Nominations: Prof. Bryson
• PTS: Dr. Safford
• Religious Activities: Dr. Kinsey
• Research & Publications: No appointment needed at this time.
• Student Health & Welfare: Dr. Langley, Dr. Stephens
• Technology: Prof. Pitt
• Writing: Dr. Gamae, Dr. Poe, Dr. Anna Hull
• Faculty Secretary:? [Not yet]
• Parliamentarian: Dr. Flint
• Non-Voting Rep. to Board of Trustees: Dr. Poe
[Note: the faculty will still need to elect a faculty secretary for a one year term.]
IV. Discussion Items
A. Recommended Process for Petitioning the Board of Trustees by the Faculty: Dr. D. Zizwe Poe.
Dr. Poe says he has sent an email to the entire faculty a proposal to create a process that will need to be followed in the future by the faculty when they petition the Board of Trustees. He was too late to place his motion for action for this month faculty meeting. He would have it on the faculty meeting agenda for action at the faculty meeting to approve the graduation list later this month.
B. Update from the Writing Proficiency Program: Prof. William Donahue and Dr. Samaa Gamie.
The goal of the Writing Proficiency Program is to ensure all Lincoln University students graduate with a high level of writing proficiency that would be reflective of the academic culture of Lincoln University. Successfully completing the Writing Proficiency Program will become a graduation requirement for all Lincoln University students starting with the graduating class of 2013.
• Pass the Writing Proficiency exam (WPE) administered in ENG 101 (Blue Book exam)
• Taking four writing-intensive courses in their major
• Submitting a successful portfolio in the major approved by the major department and the chair of the department.
Once the students successfully complete the WPP, they will be certified for graduation. However, students who are deemed not proficient writers by their department will undergo a remediation program (PREP) that is designed to assist them in revising their work and meeting their department’s expectations. Though students can be certified in the fall of senior year, it is advisable that they get certified in the fall of their junior year in ample time for graduation rather than wait for their senior year for certification.
We have designed a program: PREP (Portfolio Revision Program) in the English and Mass Communications Department that would assist students who do not meet the criteria of their program’s portfolio standards. The student learner outcomes are that the students themselves will learn to identity their writing issues, apply techniques to address their writing issues, write a proficient revision of a Writing Proficiency Program portfolio piece, and apply writing skills to other written works assigned in their regular course work. This program establishes writing groups with a facilitator to lead the students through a seven week series of instruction designed to provide an overview of the revision process. At the end of the program, a review of the student performance will be sent to the appropriate program for use in the further review of a student’s portfolio.
Effective immediately each program (major) must design a student learner outcome and rubrics concerning writing proficiency and create at least four writing intensive courses and incorporate this in their of each program assessment of student learning.
C. Update from the Faculty By-Laws Committee: Dr. Susan Safford: No report this month.
Stewardship of the University Bulletin: Dr. James DeBoy
Dr. DeBoy pointed out that we need to establish a mechanism where the University Bulletin (Catalogue) is updated. Who is responsible for the updating of the catalogue: e.g.: Office of Academic Affairs, The Registrar, and the Faculty Secretary or a combination of the above.
Albert M. Bryson