Minutes - March 17
Faculty Governance Restructuring Committee
March 17, 2008
Present: All present except Miner and Hayes. Guest: Michael Kelrick, Director of Interdisciplinary Studies.
Dr. Kelrick approached the committee with several concerns and issues that also reflect committee questions about how to represent interdisciplinary faculty and concerns within the new governance structure. We began by looking at three key issues:
1. Who are the interdisciplinary faculty? What criteria, if any, must a faculty member meet in order to be called interdisciplinary? Are there, or will there be, faculty whose designated academic home will be “interdisciplinary studies” rather than a single-discipline department?
2. Should interdisciplinary studies be viewed as an academic unit, like a department?
3. If interdisciplinary studies is not viewed as an academic unit, how will decisions be made about where interdisciplinary minors are housed?
Three of the existing interdisciplinary minors have their homes in the VPAA/Interdisciplinary Studies Office (Environmental Studies, Folklore, and Cognitive Science). Several others (Asian, African, African-American, Mathematics/Biology, Medieval Studies, International Studies, Women’s and Gender Studies) have homes in a division. Since the divisions no longer exist, these minors will have to choose an academic home. There are also 8-9 minors-to-be-proposed that are in various stages of incubation.
The committee discussed several possible reasons for the proliferation of interdisciplinary minors, including budgetary implications, the lack of CBHE paperwork to file (as opposed to new majors), the part that unique minors can play in attracting students to Truman (reflecting on the Art & Science report), the ability to respond to student interests and current states of the disciplines, the ability to help students prepare for graduate school and for careers. The committee also noted that the University has a substantial commitment to interdisciplinarity in the existing JINS courses and in the proposed freshman seminar courses. What we foresee is that the demand for minors will continue to grow, affecting a subset of TSU students, and that JINS and freshman seminar courses will be the interdisciplinary “pieces” that will be common experiences for all TSU students.
Dr. Kelrick said that his favorite model for working with departments is to have some funding to offer (IDS was just offered separate funding last year) and to open that funding for proposals for interdisciplinary work. Questions of assessment naturally follow from that model. A question was raised about how JINS teachers are currently assessed but went unanswered. It was acknowledged that IDS, like other units under the VPAA, may change with the arrival of the new provost.
The committee discussed configuring IDS as a separate entity under Faculty Senate, as Graduate Council is configured (as a standing council, but still supervised by the Provost, just as Grad Council is supervised by Maria di Stefano). If that model were to be used, Interdisciplinary Council would have the same status as UGC, Grad Council, and the other standing committees being proposed in the new structure. Dr. Kelrick said that Scott Alberts had proposed such a model with representatives from the three colleges/schools, IDS itself, and student membership for a total of 13 members. That model could be used either in the current configuration of the Interdisciplinary Oversight Committee under UGC or in a freestanding council. After some discussion, the committee agreed that the connection of IDS with Undergraduate Council was of primary importance and agreed to recommend that the Interdisciplinary Oversight Committee remain a subcommittee of Undergraduate Council rather than an independent standing committee of Faculty Senate.
In terms of the number and type of faculty appointments to interdisciplinary studies, the committee discussed the logistics involved and recommended that the number of faculty teaching interdisciplinary courses and the percentage of their load allocated to interdisciplinary work be reported to Faculty Senate, UGC, and IDS each fall so that appropriate changes in representation can be made in IDOC. In terms of the specific representation on IDOC, the committee felt that UGC and the current IDOC should work that out in UGC.
In terms of the presence of IDS on UGC and Faculty Senate, the committee felt that the director’s time would be better spent at UGC. We recommend that the director be an invited guest at all Faculty Senate meetings, with the power to participate in discussion but not the power to vote. The kind of representation IDS should have within UGC might best be decided at UGC.
Finally, we believe that budgetary matters that involve interdisciplinary studies, the assessment of JINS courses, and the results of the freshmen interdisciplinary seminars are all matters of primary concern to IDS and should be reported there.
To prepare for our next meeting, Neitzke and Jones agreed to disseminate a draft of their representation scheme and Bulen agreed to do a draft of the revised Graduate Council scheme. Johnson distributed the minutes for the March 3 meeting and a suggestion for the standing committees under Faculty Senate.