March 22, 2004

Present: Judith Anderson, Erik Bucy, Katy Fraser, Jeff Hart, Kevin Hunt (chair), Chuck Livingston (recorder), Al Ruesink, Rob Shakespeare

1. The meeting began at 2:00 PM with the approval of the minutes for March 8, as amended.

2. In his list of strategic priorities for the College, Dean Subbaswamy included the need for improving the senior year experience. One CPC member questioned the reliability of the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), which served to identify this need. Other Committee members suggested that the educational experience of all students could be elevated by addressing the poor academic atmosphere that exists, for instance, in many on-campus living environments. Raising admission standards might also serve to improve the academic experience of all students. Committee members expressed the hope that efforts directed immediately toward the senior experience will focus on existing strengths and opportunities, and not toward new mandated activities.

3. The State has given IUB roughly $3.9 million for research related projects. Before spring break, departmental chairs were informed of the need to submit proposals (in the $200-500 thousand range) with the College facing a deadline of April 2 for submissions. Committee members expressed concerns about the early deadline and poor communication regarding this funding.

4. A Committee member noted that a bill approved by the House of Representatives and now before the Senate to reauthorize Title VI funding for International Studies Programs also includes a provision calling for the creation of an advisory board to "review, monitor, apprise, and evaluate the activities" of international studies programs. (Details can be found in the legislation section of the senate.gov web page, under H.R.3077, Section 633.) Committee members discussed a number of concerns regarding this provision as it relates to issues of academic freedom. This provision has been motivated in part by charges from some quarters that Title VI-funded programs in Middle Eastern Studies tend to purvey extreme and one-sided criticisms of American foreign policy.

5. Two Committee members suggested that in its role in receiving College policy questions from the faculty at large, the Committee might serve as a resource to faculty or groups of faculty, especially junior faculty, who face what they perceive to be inappropriate professional actions by senior colleagues, departmental chairs, or administrators. The consensus of the Committee is that in general the CPC is not a grievance committee and there are more appropriate venues for raising the details of a particular grievance. On the other hand, in those cases in which explicit policy issues arise, the CPC should be alerted.

6. The Committee has received reports of mixed communications received by job candidates and tenure candidates from various levels of administration regarding specifics of tenure considerations. The CPC will discuss this issue at a future meeting.

7. At the CPC meeting of March 8, Dean Subbaswamy expressed his desire that the ongoing review of the graduate school will lead to a restructuring in which the College will assume full responsibility over its graduate programs. While some Committee members expressed their support for the Dean's position, others raised specific issues that need to be addressed. In particular, one Committee member stated that budgetary incentives have forced the College to focus on undergraduate education to an extent that is detrimental to graduate education - for instance leading to strong lower limits on graduate course size and uncompetitively heavy work loads for AIs. In this regard some Committee members believe that the Graduate School can serve as a counter force to these incentives and that, while a move toward transforming the College into a School of Arts and Science might be worthwhile, the value of an effective external advocate for graduate education should be recognized, and the role of graduate education in the College should be fully explored before moving forward with the Dean's proposal.

8. Dean Subbaswamy joined the meeting at 3:05 PM. He informed the Committee that this year's round for Commitment to Excellence funding is proceeding and that he continues to monitor it carefully to assure that the College receives consideration proportionate to its size and contribution to the campus.

With regards to the review of the Graduate School, the Dean has forwarded his remarks to the President's Graduate School Review Committee. He hopes that the process will lead to greater autonomy for the College in its relationship to graduate students, but notes the benefits of the process in raising important issues.

With regards to the $3.9 million in research funding received by the campus, the Dean noted his frustration that funding has been available for several months, but that the call for proposals was delayed until near the April 2 deadline. Again, the issue of whether the College receives a voice in proportion to its role on the Campus was discussed.

There is the expectation that the tuition increase will be 4 percent this year. The effect of this on the College budget cannot now be known, since the size of any mandated salary increase has not been announced.

9. The Dean left the meeting at 3:30 PM.

10. The meeting conclude with a brief discussion of the upcoming election to the CPC, and adjourned at 3:40 PM.

Questions or comments regarding the minutes and actions of the Policy Committee may be addressed to Kevin Hunt 5-3857, Dept. of Anthropology, Student Building 248, khunt@indiana.edu. Past minutes and College Policy Statements can be found at the CPC web page: www.indiana.edu/~college/faculty/policy/policies.shtml.