March 26^th, 2007

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

Our meeting was convened at 4:02.

We read and approved the minutes of our March 19th meeting.

We learned that there still are departmental budget planning meetings to be scheduled. We still expect to have at least one CPC member present at each meeting.

We discussed themes that have emerged from departmental budget planning meetings. We particularly focused on course releases and course reductions. Even from our brief discussion, we noted that there is a wide variety of practices across and within departments. We expressed concern about the disparity in treatment.

Dean Bertenthal joined us at 4:33. Much of our discussion focused on three issues that have arisen from budget meetings.

The first issue dealt with the apparent lack of clear links between students’ lab fees and the funds that return to departments that teach those courses. Dean Bertenthal noted that there is, in fact, no one-to-one relationship between the funds received by lab fees and what returns to departments. Rather, there are numerous ways by which the funds do return to departments. He expressed no doubt that departments with lab courses fully recover the funds raised by fees, such as, for example, through AI funding and the provision of resources. He also noted that it would be possible, if necessary, to clearly delineate where specific funds do go, but that such efforts would be inefficient and unhelpful.

The second issue dealt with what we have identified as the gradual usurpation of professional staff's time by increased administrative demands outside the control of departments. Dean Bertenthal noted that these demands come with the age of accountability. He noted that the increased demands mainly are beyond the College’s control and are a response to the need to provide more administrative-type documentation. He also noted, however, that he is very much aware of these changes and that there may be a need to accommodate by, for example and where possible, providing extra support.

The third matter involved joint appointments in departments that rely on partial FTE's to cover teaching and service loads. Concern focused on agreements among departments and individual faculty members. Dean Bertenthal noted that these matters are, indeed, increasingly being taken care of by Memoranda of Understanding ("MOUs"). These documents sometimes are formal agreements between individuals and affected units but most often are part of offer letters made to newly hired faculty. He noted that issues arising from joint-appointments are part of much larger issues relating to the sharing of FTEs. He did find formalizing expectations through MOUs helpful but highlighted that they often do not erase difficulties and challenges. He provided the example of what happens when someone receives a grant; the overhead for that grant, course releases, etc. may lead to other rounds of negotiations. It often is difficult to foreshadow how faculty needs will develop; and it is important to encourage and accommodate those needs.

Dean Bertenthal left the meeting at 5:29.

We returned to our discussion about the development of a policy relating to the times at which faculty offer exams. Recognizing that the matter potentially was more complex than we had anticipated, we tabled the discussion and identified individuals best positioned to brief us on these issues.

The meeting was adjourned at 5:53.

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.