13 September 2002

Present: Tom Gieryn (Chair), Catherine Fraser, Roy Gardner, Susan Gubar, Charles Livingston, Jim Franklin (Recorder, pro tempore)

1. The meeting began at 10:15 with the approval of the minutes of the meeting of 6 September.

2. In order to facilitate discussion of the Dean’s draft statement for the Campus Strategic Planning Committee, the agenda was abbreviated to a few reports.

a) Tom Gieryn reported that the focus of the Committee on Undergraduate Education this semester was to be the Fundamental Skills Math Requirement. It was agreed that the Committee will ask for a report from the Dean (who is replacing Linda Smith as head of that committee for the semester) rather than send a representative to the CUE.

b) Gieryn reported that he had forwarded to the Dean the Committee’s comments on the CIC Course Share proposal.

c) Deidre Lynch has been elected to the BFC as the at-large representative of the College. As such, she is the designated liaison between the BFC and the CPC, and it was agreed to ask her to sit in our meetings as a non-voting member for the semester.

d) The Committee was asked to devise and elicit from faculty questions for addition to the sample questionnaire that will initiate the three-year review of the Dean.

3. Discussion of the Dean’s draft statement for the Campus Strategic Planning Committee was wide-ranging and emphasized the Committee’s concern with the speed with which the document needs to be prepared. The draft had been distributed the previous day to Chairs and Directors; draft statements regarding the given areas of priority are being prepared by Chairs, Directors, and other appropriate faculty members; the final report is due in the Chancellor's office on October 1. Attention focused on the five major areas of priority. How had these areas been arrived at, and to what degree would departments and programs have to follow these leads in the desire to achieve funding and growth? Will these emphases in the long-term lead to restructuring of College departments and programs? Is this more than a short-term document?

With the arrival of the Dean at 11:15, discussion became more focused. He explained the overall structure of the document: a) it needs to emphasize the multiple schools and aspects of the College vis-a-vis other units of the University; b) it must insist that IU cannot rise to the top rank of colleges and universities with only a few top rank programs, that strength instead must be present across the curriculum; c) priority areas can be designated in such a way as to strengthen a broad cross-section of departments and programs. The emphasis on interdisciplinarity follows from these points, reflects issues and pressures rising from departments and programs, and comes also from the College’s long-term planning document, the Academic Enhancement Plan. This more short term document reflects the Chancellor’s charge to develop the University’s immediate areas of priority for using the $1000 additional fee to be charged students beginning next fall, and as that money will be limited, the focus on interdisciplinarity and cooperation is further necessary. Specific proposals in line with the then established areas will be solicited later. Although speed in preparation of the document is of the essence, chairs and directors will have input into the process through contact with the persons chosen to write the drafts of the statements of the various areas. In response to questioning about long-term effects on the College, the Dean reiterated the limited nature of the funds to be deployed and his belief that strong interdisciplinary programs rise from strong core departments, where undergraduate and graduate student demand for classes will prevent major restructuring in the size and faculty composition of College departments.

The meeting adjourned at 11:45.