• GFO Bylaws
• Officials, Councils and Committees
• People »
  • Members
  • GFO Chairs
  • Founding Faculty
• Minutes
• Awards
• Documents »
  • Program Planning Policy
  • Faculty Governance Primer
  • The Lower Division Task Force Draft Report
  • Planning Parameters for a Lower Division Program
  • Good Teaching at UW Bothell
  • First UW Bothell Job Satisfaction Survey Report
• Annual Reports
• GFO Newsletters
• Blackboard

Executive Council Meeting: 10/18/2004

October 18, 2004, 4:00 pm., UW2 327

Present: Kevin Laverty, Jim Miller, Clark Olson, Bill Seaburg, Barbara Van Sant and Linda Watts

Guests: Tom Bellamy, Bruce Burgett and JoLynn Edwards

EC members offer priorities for 2004 - 2005

Kevin began the meeting asking EC members to state any priorities or accomplishments that the Council members would like to see the EC achieve this year. Prior to the meeting, Kevin had distributed his three goals (copy attached):

• Practical ways to enhance research now:
  1. Make it possible for faculty to arrange ("stack") their teaching schedule to have research quarters
  2. Schedule program and committee meetings so as to create and protect blocks of faculty time for research
• Rationalize faculty service responsibilities. Look at the GFO Committee structure, task forces and non-GFO committees that faculty are asked to serve on. Make sure work is meaningful and that we follow through on initiatives.
• Encourage and support a strategy for environmental sustainability and stewardship in our curriculum and our operations. Consider our "collocation" with a world-class habitat restoration project, our campus' visibility, and the environment being a core interest of faculty from all of our disciplines -- I think we have the opportunity to a be a model and leader by making environmental sustainability and stewardship part of our signature and brand. On July 29, President Emmert posted "Environmental Stewardship at the University of Washington" -- see

http://admin.urel.washington.edu/oop/oop_layout2.asp?articleID=93

EC members expressed general agreement with these three goals. Other goals offered by EC members were:

• Strong support for research initiatives
• Support, continue and "see through" the work of the Academic Strategic Action Initiatives Committee (5-for-5). Working jointly with Academic Affairs, facilitate strategic planning toward implementation of the initiatives.

Think about the campus need to promote and invest in developing faculty leadership. For example, establish a standing budget established for faculty development.

• Making research budgets available to individual faculty members, so they can decide how to spend.
• Improve research climate at UWB.
• Promote an RA program to strengthen the research culture and faculty's capacity for scholarship.
• Examine differences across UWB graduate programs in [a] faculty teaching loads and [b] number of staff per student.

Linda provided the EC with an update of the status of the 5-for-5 Committee and the initiative process. Internal and external pressures of the SHB 2707 report, have somewhat delayed discussion and planning of the initiatives.

Consideration of proposal for Masters of Arts in Cultural Studies

The EC has reviewed the proposal for the Masters of Arts in Cultural Studies (MACS) and will determine whether the EC will approve forwarding the proposal to the consideration of UWB's Academic Council. The EC's role in reviewing a pre-proposal was discussed; Kevin clarified the EC's role in review of a full proposal. The EC is the faculty decision-making body for approval of new programs.

Discussion points of the proposal:

• This degree program grows out of the 1998 IAS strategic plan for three graduate programs: Policy Studies, Cultural Studies and Environmental Studies.
• Bruce stated that the MACS program will regionally engage public scholarship and network with organizations that UWB does not currently have a relationship with.
• MACS will create intensity with those partnerships/good networking
• This program has the potential to become internationally recognized, as there are no models in the US
• Cross-programmatic implications:
• Counting FTEs
• Curriculum overlaps
• Joint teaching
• With campus focus on lower division, we must not lose sight of upper division
• Concern was registered over equity in resource allocation across degrees and academic programs in terms of overall budget construction, faculty lines, staffing levels and administrative support
• Student demand for the degree program has been researched, data supports interest in the program
• This region has a high level of arts organizations; we are a cultural capital for the arts
• Self-funding/self-sustaining issues - will the BA be paying for the MA?
• MACS has support of the Graduate School
• MACS started as a thesis model but it has evolved - greater depth and breadth
• Because the program is community-based, an administrative staff person is proposed
• Adequate funding of the program is crucial for success and EC endorsement

After deliberation, the EC recommends that a mechanism for counting shared FTEs be established and in the role of the budget and planning body for the faculty, adequate funding for implementation of all new programs is mandatory.

Motion

A motion to approve the MACS proposal for forwarding to the consideration of UWB's Academic Council was made, seconded and unanimously approved.

Motion

A motion of the EC calls for the MACS proposal and any other proposals be returned to the EC before implementation for discussion if adequate funding is not available; motion seconded and unanimously approved.

Next meeting date was set for Monday, October 25, 2004.

Minutes submitted by Barbara Van Sant