Auburn University Steering Committee
Minutes
Thursday, February 4, 2016, 3:30 p.m.
206 Samford Hall

Present: Larry Teeter (Chair), Laura Plexico (Secretary), Xing Ping Hu (Secretary-Elect), Lisa Kensler, Emily Myers, Emmett Winn, Sara Wolf, Jared Russell, Keven Yost, Patricia Duffy (Immediate-Past Chair), Timothy Boosinger, Drew Clark, Walker Byrd

Absent: James Goldstein (Chair-Elect),

The first item of business was approval of the January 21, 2016 steering minutes.

Following approval of the minutes, there was discussion of possible nominees for the Rules Committee. After a brief discussion of Walker Byrd, president of the SGA, provided information and background on the proposal regarding high-stakes assignments during the last week of class. He came to the steering committee to get feedback and direction on what to do with the proposal. The proposal asks that faculty not have high stakes assignments or exams that are more than 10% of the grade during the last five calendar days prior to the study period.

Lisa Kensler asked and clarified that this proposal is for undergraduate coursework only. She asked how semester long projects that might be more than 10% of the grade would be handled. There was also some discussion over what constitutes “a high stakes assignment” and there would be discipline specific issues that the policy may not clearly address. Patricia Duffy also pointed out that two credit hour classes don’t have to give exams during final exam week. They give them on the final day of class, which is also not covered in the policy.

Walker Byrd asked the committee for recommendations on how to proceed. Steering suggested that the proposal needs increased clarity with regards to class projects. It was suggested by the group to limit the policy to exams or quizzes or to make a recommendations for best practice rather than a policy. The group also questioned whether 10% was an appropriate percentage. The group also suggested that they analyze syllabi and gather data on how pervasive the problem is as there currently is no more than anecdotal evidence. Steering also suggested that students should provide this feedback in their course evaluations to effect change.

Following the discussion with Walker Byrd the tentative senate agenda for the February 16 meeting was discussed. The policy on limiting exams and the policy on lecturers teaching graduate coursework will not be included in the February meeting and will be tabled for a later date. The second part of copyright policy will be ready for steering soon. Emmett suggested Bliss Baily could present information on the supercomputer as an information item.

Faculty representation on new committees to support RCM budget model was then addressed by Drew Clark. Currently there is a university budget advisory committee that functions mostly as a listening group to bring back information to the faculty. The new committees are intended to increase shared governance by giving real work for the committee to perform.
The Central Unit Allocations Committee’s principle job is to create dialogue and collaboration between academic and central support units. There will be more focused discussion of what the units need and funding levels required for units to deliver their services. This committee will structure, organize and give discipline to those conversation. The Space Management and Deferred Maintenance Committee would serve as a brokerage for the swapping of space and deferred maintenance activities.

The University Budget Advisory committee will review and recommend to senior leadership the University budget submitted to the President for final approval. They will advise senior leadership on the use and allocation of resources from the University’s Mission Enhancement Fund. After five years the committee will form a task force to examine the model and its alignment with the University’s mission.

Questions were asked by members of Steering about committee composition. Specifically, it was asked 1) whether there would be adequate representation across schools and colleges and 2) whether there would be representation of faculty who are not heads or chairs? Drew Clark and the Provost indicated that the intent is for faculty to be represented and represented across schools and colleges.

The new committees and their charges will be presented at the Senate and will be put in the call for volunteers. It is anticipated that each of these committees will require bimonthly meetings.

At conclusion of the meeting Emmett inquired as to why the faculty handbook changes were pulled from the Board of Trustees meeting. Patricia nor Larry were aware of why they had been pulled.

 

Adjourned 4:45