Eastern Mennonite University
Undergraduate Council
August 17, 2007
#1
CC301/302

Present: Marie Morris, Beth Aracena, Kim Brenneman, Spencer Cowles, Vi Dutcher, Cathy Smeltzer Erb, Doug
Graber Neufeld, Cyndi Gusler, Nancy Heisey, Jerry Holsopple, Elroy Miller, Patrick Reynolds, Gloria Rhodes, Deirdre Smeltzer, Mary Sprunger, Lester Zook

Absent: Joan Griffing, Arlene Wiens
Guests: Ann Hershberger for Arlene, Amy Springer (for item #6)
Student Rep:

1. In the Opening Reflections, Marie shared that EMU, after many years, still has outstanding faculty, staff and students who together offer gifts, talents and potential with promise that is unlike any other institution. With all that EMU has, it can still do better by continuing to work at excellence in areas of engaged learning and in nurturing an environment for growth and learning for all. Marie closed with the following quote and a prayer.

"...do not be impatient and do not be afraid.....you already have what you need right in your hands! You have the grace of your vocation and of your love. No earthly situation has ever been ideal. God does not need an ideal situation in order to carry out his work in our hearts. If we do what we can with the means and grace at our disposal, if we sincerely take advantage of our genuine opportunities, the Spirit will be there and His love will not fail us. Our liberation, our solitude, our vision, our understanding, and our salvation do not depend on anything remote from us or beyond our reach." ~Thomas Merton

2. Marie identified the following objectives of today’s meeting:

Renew our call to teaching in a Christian liberal arts college.
Begin building a strong undergraduate identity, which includes a vision for the undergraduate unit.
Set key priorities for 2007-08.
Identify concrete “next steps” to achieve identified priorities.

Marie then asked who else needs to be a part of the Undergraduate Council. Do we still want a student representative? For their part, yes, the students would like a representative, and Council agreed, although it should be the SGA co-presidents. Council also agreed that it body should be made up only of chairs, others (e.g. Assistant Dean, VP of Student Life, Registrar) will be called in as issues arise.

3. Building an Undergraduate Identity

Marie felt it was important to clarify various roles. She noted that the Undergraduate Council is an official decision making body in the university structure. Dean’s committee, in her view, is the executive team of Undergraduate Council. Their tasks include preparing the agenda, proposals, issues, etc. for review and action by the Council. The following persons are on Dean’s Committee: Marie Morris, Nancy Heisey, (as co-chair of Undergraduate Council), Amy Springer (Assistant Dean & Coordinator of Student Success), Deirdre Smeltzer (Sciences/Faculty Senate Representative), Mary Sprunger (Humanities/Faculty Senate Representative), Spencer Cowles (Professions/Faculty Senate Representative). Faculty Senate serves a facilitation role in helping to process issues/ideas among the faculty and to provide a forum for faculty voice. And GVCC is a recommending body to UG Council with regard to the global village curriculum. The relationship of UG Council and Faculty Senate is a collaborative one in helping to ensure that the best interests of the undergraduate unit (i.e. faculty and students) are met.

Marie clarified that UG FTE reduction decisions made last spring by President’s Cabinet were made at the request of Faculty Senate stemming from their belief that faculty couldn’t “cut” their own.

It was noted that with the decision to create clusters, the cluster coordinator and department chair roles will need to be defined. It was generally felt by Council members that the hours these roles require should be considered administrative and should not count as academic hours toward the faculty-to-student ratio goal. Other institutions see this as an academic function, so it may not be possible to make the change.

4. Identifying Undergraduate Priorities for 07-08

Following are discussion points on how to engage the tension of UG FTE reduction and Academic Vision 2017 – how do we hold these together and how might our ideals become a reality?

Marie noted that Dickeson’s model was designed for cutting entire programs, but that our programs are so interconnected and interdependent, that cutting one program could/would severely impair another. This is likely why it has been such a struggle to make cuts. Council felt that a grand design was needed to help make the necessary cuts.
Trying to get EMU in a better place financially, increasing enrollment without cutting depts., all while making other cuts is a task that is still ongoing. Council feels at times that depts. and faculty are being “nibbled to death by a duck”.
One possibility to address reduced contracts for long term faculty might be to redirect their hours, for example, filling out their time by assisting with enrollment and recruitment. It was noted that Steven Johnson, associate professor of visual & communication arts, met with the president and director of admissions over the summer to brainstorm possibilities that will be reviewed by the Undergraduate Enrollment Strategies Group.
Oct. 15 was the deadline given by the President in the May meeting for finalizing cuts that would affect jobs for the following year, in order to give individuals advance warning and allow the president to report to the Board of Trustees. To begin to develop a response to this mandate, Marie asked dept. chairs to list what cuts their depts. have already made, using 2005-06 as the baseline data. Dean’s Committee, at the request of Marie, will help evaluate the numbers the dept. chairs provide along with the numbers from Ron Piper.
The question remains, can faculty make a concrete counter proposal to the recommended cuts?

Marie invited Council to review the draft “Think Piece” for an Academic Vision 2017. Might this serve as a useful framework for guiding the future of the undergraduate unit? Council members spent time reviewing and discussing the key assumptions identified in the vision document and offered additional comments:

Accountability
Create a culture that sorts out the good and the better
Sustainability – should we create a sustainability program as a student experience?
Maintaining a healthy body, mind, and spirit
Expect of ourselves what we expect of our students
Embrace the reality that EMU has range of student ability; be excited that we give students opportunity to explore their potential.
Teaching happens outside of class as well as in class
Keep students and their parents interests in mind.
Our academic and community life are shaped to promote Christian faith formation and spiritural growth.

5. Goals for 07-08

As with a garden, hard work and sweat is needed to see the fruits of our labor. The tasks that need to be performed are: clustering, GVC revision, meeting UG FTE reduction expectations, etc.

UG FTE Reduction

There is great frustration over the whole process; i.e. what is the process for determining the cuts, how will the faculty and students be involved, will counter proposals be considered, how do faculty appeal the cuts?
What recommendations are doable?
It was suggested, and affirmed, that all appeals and counter proposals should be made by Council rather than individual depts. or programs.
It was agreed to use the Sept. 17 Undergraduate Council meeting as a time to bring together the various departmental responses to draft a coherent “counter proposal” to the UG FTE Reduction plan that was presented by Cabinet on May 3, 2007.

Cluster Formations

In an effort to let “structure emerge from passion” the following clusters seem to be emerging:

Sciences: biology, chemistry, math, psychology. There is question as to whether sociology and social work may also be included here. And, if so, where does that leave JPCS with their close connections to Soc/Sowk?
Humanities: lang & lit, history, bible & religion. There is question as to whether JPCS and sociology might be located in this cluster. If so, where does that leave social work?
Fine & Performing Arts: VACA, theater, music. It was noted that all three of these departments are distinct in what they do so the structure for this cluster might need to take a different form. In particular it was suggested that music is somewhat unique as a performing art, and that finding a fitting cluster may be difficult.
Professions: business, education, nursing, physical education & recreation. Marie noted that the three programs within the physical education & recreation department relate to three separate departments (i.e. bible & religion, business, and education) making it awkward for them to be located in education, as suggested by the plan presented May 3, 2007.

Why cluster? The advantages were listed as follows:

Collaborative energy and the possible reduction of direct reports to the dean
Will likely be energizing, but may well result is cost cuts
Maintain interdisciplinary relationships
Each cluster will handle administrative duties that fits their function.

Should we cluster in unusual groups, i.e. theater with bible & religion? It was noted that there may not be a “one size fits all” structure for the clusters. It was agreed that over the next several weeks Marie will meet with each of the emerging clusters to discuss further what the various leadership roles, and appropriate compensation (i.e. load time vs stipend) for those roles.

GVC Revision

The following were discussion points and ideas:

Should the FYC (First Year Curriculum) be proposed now or wait until clustering is implemented?
We need to make a plan for the next 2-3 years that will allow the changes needing to take place. Could each dept. provide a course for GVC?
We need to rely on those who have led the programs in recent years to determine what is the best course of action. Perhaps a brief history of what works and doesn’t to be given to interested faculty.
If we want to have smaller class sizes for first year seminar we may be looking at 10 faculty members teaching 10 different sections to successfully teach FYE. If so, we may have to cut something else in GVC to accomplish this.
It was noted that GVC makes up 30% of the student’s curriculum, yet EMU spends only 6% of total SH on the program.

6. Other
Amy reviewed Orientation activities.

Recorder – Cheryl Doss