EXEC COM MEETING w/ PROVOST JOHN PRITCHETT, 6-14-01

Attending:  Dr. Pritchett, Herb Rotfeld, Gary Mullen, Christa Slaton, George Crandell, Paula Sullenger, Ruth Crocker, Judy Sheppard, Conner Bailey, and Marty Olliff

Judy presented Provost Pritchett with 6 questions (click here for full questions).

1.  Presidential Search:
Dr. Pritchett indicated that the Provost's office serves the academic Programs of the University, first and foremost, and that his personal agenda is to work toward healing the rifts among all factions.  If the Board requires his office to provide faculty names for the presidential search as currently constructed, that will remove his office from effectively doing its job in all areas.  Provost said plainly that he will not provide the names, that he reports to the President, not the Board.  Also, even if a request is made through ranks from Board to President, Dr. Walker will not "go there."  Dr. Pritchett said the administration will have "no part of a presidency that the faculty does not buy into."

Provost does not think Board will continue search until atmosphere is rectified.

There followed a discussion of how the Board has become more active since the Funderburke era, but has done so without guidelines to direct its distinction between policy and management.  Hard traditions to change.

The consultancy of Bill Weary on the Pres. Search was discussed.  Pritchett believes that he should and will take a broad approach, trying to seek information from all groups rather then just rubber-stamping Mr. Miller's private search for a president.

Discussion of consultancy of Peter Pedan, atty from Atlanta, involved in administration's response to JAC's complaint to SACS.  Pritchett assumes Pedan is not an advocate, but a fact finder, in response to Christa's concerns about his largely unspecified role and unknown cost.

2.  Searches for heads, chairs, etc.
Dean of CLA Pindzola was an immediate acting dean appointed in the wake of the administration's "fruitbasket upheaval" of February.  There was an internal search that led to her being installed as interim.

Education:  committee to search for an interim to replace Kunkel has met and hopes to be finished by June 30.  If that's not possible, committee will continue its work, w/ Assoc. Deans running helm for the time being.

Business dean not addressed, though Provost did respond to Herb's suggestion that, because any search for a business dean would produce 5 internal candidates, an internal search for a limited-term full dean be conducted with input on concept from CoB.  Provost to take same up with President Walker.

All dean searches:  Provost considers them just as critical as Pres. search.  Method:  bring ALL constituencies together, establish vision of what unit should be, then recruit towards specific fit with that vision.  Doing this is problematic given the present atmosphere on campus.

Jour-Comm [Newspeak?] Chair search:  Judy noted that candidate Buyega had enthusiastic support of ALL Jour-Comm faculty, but was rejected by CLA dean because he was not a "good fit."  Pindzola requested dept. to do internal search.  Judy asked for upper administration's help in resolving the resulting dispute because, as she put it, "some of this is y'all's doing because of merging the departments against their will."  Discussion by Provost regarding interactions of deans and dept. chairs.  Christa asked why an interim dean had so much power to completely disregard desire of faculty and make long-term decisions.  Provost responded that interims cannot be "mere caretakers" and that an appeals process did exist.

Gary addressed a broader issue:  conflict between choice of dept head by dean based on personality, fit, etc, contrary to faculty support flies in face of faculty handbook that privileges faculty input over dean's desire in such situations.

Short discussions ensued over faculty input on Board Visitation Program and on replacement of ACES Director Steve Jones.

3.  CoA Dean problems
Provost recounted three votes over past year at CoA:  vote towards vote of confidence, vote that yielded "no confidence," most recent vote calling for Dean to resign.  In response to first two votes, Dr. Walker and Dean Waters initiated a series of visitations, current Provost not involved.  In Feb., Pritchett knew that vote asking for resignation was coming, asked Waters to assess problems.  After vote, Pritchett was mistakenly quoted as saying that Waters enjoyed full confidence of administration.

Provost has assembled an assessment team of 3 faculty (chosen by Pritchett and Waters from 6 nominations), 3 department heads, reps from commodity groups, June Hinton as outside dean, and Debra Carey as Staff rep.  Provost has asked James Seroka of Center for Govt. Services to design a draft survey instrument for evaluation committee to consider.  Committee asked to identify key issues in assessment, and may do so with any tools they chose or with currently available information.  If they chose to use any form of the Seroka survey, it will go to Faculty and Staff in CoA.  In response to Marty's question about privileging faculty input (or at least not watering it down with staff input), Provost suggested using different colored paper, possibly with different questions.  No guarantee or method created to ensure such privilege other than ready identification of survey.
Dean is to do self-assessment.  Herb asked why a dean would want to retain his position in the face of such overwhelming votes of no confidence and requests for his resignation.

4.  AES faculty conversion to 9 month appointments. [HELP ME HERE]
Provost detailed a history of emerging funding crisis at AES.  No new money + split appointments yielded budget composed of >90% salary liability.  Also, esp. during Martin Admin., AES used as a "bank" by manipulating relationship between appointments and deferred maintenance of buildings on a $/sq. ft. allocated basis.

Solutions:  convert AES to "funding agency" by 3 steps:
a.  central core of AES buildings identified with University picking up 100% of tab for maintenance.  Frees up $0.75M
b.  convert some AES to 9 month appointments, allowing them to consult but freeing up 25% of salaries.
c.  convert all AES faculty to Division I faculty, thus freeing 100% of AES funds tied up in salaries.

Problem arose because of Federal ACES appointments, all of which are locked into 12 month terms, thereby penalizing those folks who could not then consult.

Conner noted that Division 3 funds subsidize Division 1 activities (teaching).

Provost wants to use U. of Illinois as model for how to handle this challenge.

5.  BoT Visitation Program Vote:  Concerned expressed that raw vote numbers might be misinterpreted by Board as an endorsement of program, when faculty-only vote was much closer.

6.  Untenured Lecturer Plan:  Provost wanted to listen to further discussion on this.