Date/Time/Location: Wednesday, March 23, 2022, 1:00 PM, Madison Hall President’s Conference Room/Zoom Webinar
Members Present:
In Person: Alan Beckenstein, Aaron Bloomfield, Bob Hirosky, Susan Kirk (Chair), Tish Jennings (Chair Elect), Peter Norton
Zoom: Hanadi Al-Samman, Aniko Bodroghkozy, Jim Fitz-Gerald, Joel Hockensmith (Past Chair), Kevin Lehmann, Eric Ramirez-Weaver
Guests/Others Present:
In Person: Ian Baucom (Provost), Maïté Brandt-Pearce (Vice Provost Faculty Affairs)
Zoom: Joe Fore (General Faculty Council), Brie Gertler (Vice Provost Academic Affairs), George Mentore (AAUP), Brian Pusser (Parliamentarian), Nicole Thorne Jenkins (Dean, McIntire), JJ Wagner-Davis (EVP-COO)
Meeting Called to Order
1:02 PM
February 2022 EXCO Minutes
Susan Kirk shared minutes from February 2022 EXCO Meeting to review.
Motion to approve minutes: Aaron Bloomfield
Second: Alan Beckenstein
For: 7 Against: 0 Abstain: 1
MOTION PASSES
Updates from the Provost
Ian Baucom, Provost
-
Ian shared that he and Susan Kirk discussed what might be the most beneficial path forward for Ian’s presence in these meetings. Would it be useful to identify long-term strategic things to be thinking about?
-
Dean Searches
-
School of Nursing and School of Education and Human Development searches moving to the final stages
-
Arts & Sciences, SCPS searches have launched
-
Recruiting has begun
-
Ian will recuse himself from early stages of A&S search
-
-
-
Budget Meetings
-
Began meeting with Deans of each school this week
-
First year of revised version of financial model
-
In older model, up to ¼ of budget was allocated to support Central Services
-
Feature of new model is base tax on expenditure of schools that flows to central services, services then must live within that range (effectively schools control their own contribution)
-
-
New University Fund (in addition to base support from Provost Office that flows to schools)
-
Schools apply for special projects. Tends to be seed funding for new educational programs, faculty research, DEI initiatives.
-
-
There are some central sources that can now be reallocated.
-
Support for university-wide research infrastructure
-
Support for graduate education
-
Support for diversity hiring initiatives
-
-
-
Investments
-
Allocating up to $100M to research areas this year
-
Neuroscience
-
Environmental Sustainability
-
Faculty groups submitted proposals in the Fall
-
Now being reviewed by Deans, Institute Directors, outside scholars
-
Hope to make announcements by late spring/early summer
-
-
-
Next year will make additional investments at roughly same level
-
Digital Society and Technology
-
Precision Medicine/Precision Health
-
-
-
Learning Management System
-
Committee evaluated current LMS (have 4-5 platforms currently)
-
Charge was to find a common platform to be used across the University
-
Decision on LMS will be shared with steering committee at the end of the week
-
-
Review of Promotion & Tenure Policy
-
First step was to identify key goals of this review
-
Clarity of expectations
-
Appropriate equity across all schools
-
Ensure there is no bias in the review process, attending to equity in the review, being deliberative and proactive in review to ensure that all faculty receive fair review
-
-
Process
-
Briefed Deans on Monday
-
Maïté is working with the associate deans
-
Want to engage this group as well
-
Process should take about a year
-
-
-
Undergraduate Enrollment
-
Have asked Deans to submit proposal on what they want enrollment future to be like.
-
Shared those with Deans on Monday
-
Sum of proposals was between 2,000 and 3,000 more students across schools
-
Next step is to do initial cost analysis, try to understand how those numbers impact revenues and costs as well as pedagogical and mission purpose.
-
-
What does this mean about what kind of University we are? What’s out academic purpose?
-
How do we think long-term about relationship between our defining model and off grounds? Presence in digital arena? Northern Virginia? Global presence? Global presence? Academic time?
-
-
Covid
-
Lifted mask mandate this week, next is deciding on classroom masking.
-
President will share where we are on that in next few days.
-
-
Discussion
Tish Jennings: Have heard from some undergrads that having to be here can be problematic for students. Any possibility of surveying students as part of looking at undergraduate education?
Brie Gertler: We asked Deans to consider residential undergrad enrollment. Non-residential undergrad enrollment is a great exercise to think about.
Susan Kirk: Will there be a review process for tweaks to be made for the new financial model after the next year? May be appropriate to have a Faculty Senate representative?
Ian Baucom: I would welcome some participation from this group. I don’t anticipate that we would do another fundamental revision.
Alan Beckenstein: Is Northern Virginia a congested space on the tech side now?
Ian Baucom: Yes, NOVA in general is congested but there are also opportunities because of that. One piece we’re looking at now is biotech. Chan-Zuckerberg has put out a call for biohubs: five over next 5 years, $250M/hub. We are working to put in proposals. If we were to be successful, NOVA would potentially be a site. We also have a proposal in to legislature for biotech institute. If that came through there would be state, university, donor support for up to $500M biotech enterprise. This is something Greg Fairchild is working on. We also work with the state economic development agency.
Tish Jennings: Are there other institutions we would be partnering with for Chan-Zuckerberg?
Ian Baucom: Yes, one proposal is working on contagion science; partners would be Princeton, Penn. Another proposal from SOM, drug-discovery/genomics; partners would be Hopkins, Maryland, VCU.
Peter Norton: Can appeal P&T to Grievance Committee and Provost P&T. Faculty felt that Provost P&T appeals process took a long time. Wanted to relay that concern.
Ian Baucom: This is one of the reasons why we want to work with you on this process. Would want to bring the same principles to the grievance process as we review P&T policy.
Report from the Academic Affairs Committee
Aaron Bloomfield
-
AAC approved proposal to close PhD in Slavic Studies
-
SCHEV does productivity reviews of all degrees, this was tagged as underperforming
-
This must go through EXCO and Full Senate
-
Discussion
Peter Norton: Have Slavic Studies program instructors had any comments/concerns?
Aaron Bloomfield: Any time you close a degree there is a sunset procedure, they were involved in it.
Kevin Lehmann: Is there any option for this to survive as a joint program with another VA institution?
Brie Gertler: There are 6 tenured/tenure-track faculty in Slavic Department. They will still be working with PhD students in other departments. Unsure if there are other Slavic PhD programs in state.
Aaron Bloomfield: I don’t see this as setting a precedent, we have no desire to close all underperforming programs.
Eric Ramirez-Weaver: Is there a way to fold something like this into certificate program?
Brie Gertler: I like that idea. They will still be offering graduate classes. Bar for opening certificate is much lower than degree program. Question would be about demand.
Susan Kirk: To clarify, we would need to act on closure of this. Certificate program would be another process.
Motion from AAC:
Approve closure of Slavic Languages PhD Program.
Second: Jim Fitz-Gerald
For: 11 Against: 0 Abstain: 0
MOTION PASSES
Report from the Policy Subcommittee
Peter Norton
-
Latest revision process for PROV-004 has concluded, policy has been published.
-
Peter noted some people are anxious about this policy and perceive reasonable inequities in the policy and who feel stress about it as a result. There is continuing dissatisfaction with components of the policy. Also noted that review process for PROV-004 was extensive and intensive, laborious, and time-consuming on faculty side and side of the Provost Office.
Discussion
Maïté Brandt-Pearce: Schools are undergoing own revision to adhere to changes, would welcome data we could present to allay fears, to better understand what outcomes are occurring. If you can think of data that might be helpful, happy to gather that.
Peter Norton: I’ve collected both written and spoken statements and then checked those against the policy. Have been relaying those concerns that look legitimate.
Peter shared that a major concern is delay in promotion process. Maïté said that she could work to pull data on this.
Aaron Bloomfield: Could you summarize these concerns in an email anonymously and send to Maïté?
Peter Norton: I have made sure those accounts are included, on the record. CS has done well in managing needs of AGF, good example to other schools.
Susan Kirk: I would also like to see the data. We could work together to present to this group as well. I am appreciative of Ian’s awareness of the difficulties of the PROV-004 review and hope that
Public Interest Research Group
Peter Norton
Peter shared that he was approached by the student representative for the University’s Public Interest Research Group. She would like the Faculty Senate to help spread the word to the faculty about keeping materials costs for students in classes under control. Suggested she come to Faculty Senate, tell us about the problem, make suggestions.
Peter Norton:
Motion that we include on agenda of a future senate meeting for Clare O’Reilly to have 5-10 minutes to tell us about this problem and offer some suggestions about what we can do about it.
Second: Bob Hirosky
For: 12 Against: 0 Abstain: 0
MOTION PASSES
Discussion of G. Mentore AAUP resolution
-
Susan Kirk shared there was a proposal from Walt Heinecke to Liz Magill to publicly address and refute some restrictions that are being put on faculty at other universities across the country. She asked that AAUP through Walt to consider drafting this resolution.
-
George Mentore shared that they followed circulated national template. This current version is just a first draft. Would like Exco to take a first look and see if it fits the UVA culture. He believes Walt also has a draft going.
-
Susan Kirk shared portions of the text for further discussion.
-
Tish Jennings suggested that those who have been working on different versions to come to some consensus and then bring to Faculty Senate. She volunteered to work with the other authors, consolidate versions, and present to EXCO for a vote to determine if it should be brought to Faculty Senate.
Peter Norton:
Move that Tish Jennings draft on behalf of EXCO a statement derived from the statement received from UVA AAUP freely adapted as needed for inclusion on the agenda ahead of the Faculty Senate meeting.
Second: Aaron Bloomfield
For: 10 Against: 1 Abstain: 0
MOTION PASSES
FS + GFC Working Group
Susan Kirk
-
Susan shared that John Kosky provided updated data with Susan which removed numbers from College at Wise.
-
Maïté Brandt-Pearce shared that she could pull additional data as requested.
-
Susan Kirk, Tish Jennings, Rob Patterson met with Joe Fore and Judtih Thomas from GFC to explore advantages, disadvantages of separate governing systems
-
Plan to talk to another large 4-year institution with single governing body to gain insight.
-
-
If interested in joining working group, please let Susan know.
Resumption of In-Person FS meeting
Susan Kirk
-
Planning to hold April 15 Faculty Senate meeting in person, Rouss Robertson 123
-
Meeting will be hybrid
-
-
Susan expressed that she would like to hold a reception for full Faculty Senate before the end of the semester
-
President Ryan offered Carr’s Hill if available
-
Could also pursue off-site option if preferred
-
Old Business
-
Tish Jennings shared that she has been working on scheduling meetings for next year.
-
If anyone has thoughts on how to facilitate this process, please let Tish know.
-
Should we plan for hybrid option going forward? Probably a good idea to plan for hybrid just in case.
-
-
Spring schedules aren’t set yet so looking that far out can be difficult.
-
Historically, meetings were scheduled semester by semester due to room booking restrictions.
Meeting Adjourned
Motion to Adjourn: Bob Hirosky
Second: Jim Fitz-Gerald
Meeting adjourned: 2:53 PM