February 26th, 2007

Present: Judith Anderson (Chair), Simon Brassell, Hal Evans, Tom Busey, Sandra Dolby, Roger Levesque (Recorder), Rosemary Lloyd, Patrick McNaughton and Pamela Walters.

The meeting was convened at 4:02 pm.

We read and approved the February 19th minutes.

Dean Bertenthal joined us at 4:38. He opened our discussion by noting that the annual chairs’ budget meetings had started and that he was looking forward to them; he saw them as good opportunities to learn more about departments and their needs. He then highlighted a few examples of the points he had made in the College’s annual presentation to the Provost’s Fund meeting. He expressed concern about the proposed 2.7 tuition cap, noting that, if the cap were imposed, it would have serious negative consequences for the College. He also described his efforts to engage in more long-range planning to increase the efficiency in the manner departments manage their budgets and resources. These efforts will help departments make better cases for funding and help identify issues that could be part of broader initiatives encompassing multiple departments and having broader societal implications. He expects to have departments develop new enhancement plans next year.

He provided a progress report on this year’s faculty recruitment. There have been 11 new acceptances, of which 3 are from CTE funds, 1 from strategic hire lines, and 6 are women. The College also has 11 outstanding offers, of which 3 are from CTE funds, 1 from strategic hire lines, and 4 are women. He also noted that there have been three failed searches and that the College was seeking to accommodate 2 potential spousal hires.

We then engaged in a lively discussion relating to issues of diversity and gender equity. Dean Bertenthal reported trends in faculty appointments in the College. In 1993, 32.8% of assistant professors, 32.9% of associate professors, and 13% of full professors were women. In 2004, the latest figures, 39.6% of assistant professors, 38.6% of associate professors, and 20.7% of full professors were women. [2006 figures, provided via e-mail after our meeting, are as follows: 42.8%, 39.8%, and 21.6%.] He noted that percentages vary enormously by department. To address diversity issues, he explained how he will devote part of this summer to putting together a diversity plan that will go into effect next fall. The goal of the plan will be to ensure departmental accountability to improve diversity, such as in searches to hire faculty and staff. Departments lacking diversity will need to demonstrate serious efforts to improve. It was noted that addressing issues of diversity involves numerous variables, but that efforts also should include supporting the diversity that already exists.

We then turned our discussion to the development of the Bureau of Social Science Research. Dean Bertenthal noted that Scott Long was doing all the right things by focusing, for example, on brokering information/resources and enhancing efforts to compete for external grants. He highlighted the instrumental role external grants play in the social sciences. He has found much diversity among departments in the extent to which they support efforts to obtain external funding; he hopes to help address these issues by considering the adequacy of resources for conducting research in the social sciences and the incentives for securing external funding.

Dean Bertenthal left the meeting at 5:39.

We continued our discussion of the BSSR. Some of us were surprised to learn that there had been some restructuring of Office of the Vice Provost for Research and (from what we can gather) new appointments, including, for example, Geoffrey Conrad - Special Advisor for Humanities, J. Scott Long – Associate Vice Provost for Social Sciences, Christopher Peebles - Special Advisor, Ruth Stone – Associate Vice Provost for Arts, and Jeffrey White – Associate Vice Provost for Life Sciences. This information was confirmed by the OVPR’s Research Development webpage at http://www.research.indiana.edu/leadership/leadership.html#ovpr.

We returned to discuss progress in receiving nominees for next year's CPC election. As reported last week, two candidates have withdrawn, which will delay the election slightly as we seek other nominations.

In response to recent inquiries, we discussed when our new policies go into effect. This discussion was of significance given that we have completed revisions of all our policies. We agreed that our policies go into effect once posted on-line. Thus, for example, the Policy on Determining Annual Salary Merit Increases, posted last summer, mandates that "Annual salary merit evaluations in all departments will be based on faculty accomplishments over the preceding three years." We expect departments to follow this policy, which in any case retained the language from the one we had amended.

We also discussed, in response to an inquiry, what to do with policies that have yet to be posted on-line but that were distributed to faculty (note that it takes some time to get the policies posted, but all should be on-line before spring break). We are hoping that the policies will be posted soon. In the interim, we noted that we should respond to the specific inquiry, which related to the annual departmental review of chairs. That policy was attached to the October, 30th, 2006th minutes. The relevant part reads as follows:

Every year each unit should submit a report to the Dean that reviews their Chair's performance in research, teaching and service, with especial consideration of his/her effectiveness in the execution of the responsibilities of a Chair. An appropriate departmental faculty committee that is not appointed by the Chair, such as an elected policy committee, or a merit review committee, should undertake this task. The committee must invite confidential comments on the Chair's performance from faculty, and ensure that their report both describes and considers the full spectrum of substantive faculty views. It is expected that the Dean will respond to the committee in the rare instance that serious concerns with the Chair's leadership are expressed.

We strongly recommend that departments follow this policy when evaluating their chairs this year.

We discussed and made recommendations for revisions to the second draft of our Social Science Statement, a statement that aims to explain the significance and nature of the social sciences.

The meeting was adjourned at 6:01.

Roger Levesque, Recorder

Questions or comments regarding the minutes and actions of the College Policy Committee may be addressed to its Chair, Judith Anderson (anders@indiana.edu – 855-3845). Past minutes and College Policy Statements can be found at the CPC web page: www.indiana.edu/~college/faculty/policy/policies.shtml .