Minutes for University Faculty Council Meeting,
12:30pm - 2:05pm, Friday 19 January 2007

Members Present: Javad Abbasian (ChEE), Patricia Bach (PSYC), Howard Chapman (Kent), Warren Edelstein (AMAT), Ali Emadi (ECE), Andy Howard (BCPS), Robert Krawczyk (ARCH), Art Lubin (AMAT), William Newman (MSED), Victor Pérez-Luna (ChEE), Boris Pervan (MMAE), John Snapper (HUM), Phil Troyk (BME), Geoff Williamson (ECE).

Members Absent: Jeff Budiman (CAE), Joel Goldhar (SGSB), Bill Grimshaw (SocSci), Sanjiv Kapoor (CS), Vijay Kumar (ID), XiangYang Li (CS), Ganesh Raman (MMAE), David Rudstein (Kent), Catherine Wetzel (ARCH), Chris White (BCPS).

Student Representative Present: Jason Tenenbaum.

Student Observer Present: Avelo Roy.

Visitor Present: Mary Anne Smith (University Counsel)

Call to Order: The meeting was called to order about 12:35pm on Friday 19 January 2007 in the ballroom of the McCormick / Tribune campus center.

Presidential Search:
Phil Troyk offered a report on the Presidential search. Following the Search Committee's 22 December meeting, the committee and the commerical search firm have begun making initial contacts with potential candidates. The UniFC asked what would happen if the search is sufficiently prolonged that no new President has been found by the date of President Collens's announced retirement. Mary Anne Smith and Phil confirmed that President Collens has agreed to stay on beyond his stated date if he is asked to do so.

Javad Abbasian asked about the disposition of the unedited version of the Faculty Advisory Committee's report on the search. The Advisory Committee wrote this unedited version based on the survey that it conducted in fall 2006, with the expectation that it would be distributed to the faculty members who participated in the survey. But after the report was submitted to the Search Committee, the Search Committee (with the concurrence of the search firm) directed that the report be made accessible in a limited way, but that it not be distributed widely. The reason for this limitation was that there was concern that publicizing some of the survey results might interfere with the recruitment of candidates. Accordingly, two copies are now available: one in Phil Troyk's office, and one in Mary Anne Smith's office. Faculty members who want to see the report can read it in either location.

The Council discussed this situation in detail. Javad expressed concern that many faculty may not know that the report is available, or that they may not know how to access it. Ali Emadi felt that the concern over sensitive information was ill-founded; he had been on the Advisory Committee, and did not think the information in the report was as delicate as it had been perceived. Several members asked Phil to describe how the decision had been made to limit distribution of the report. He acknowledged that the committee was making up policy as it went along, and that there had been confusion for several weeks about how to handle this report. The decision to provide two copies but not make a general distribution was intended as a compromise, and it was consistent with the Search Committee's policy that any information released had to be approved by the entire committee.

Several members recommended a modest increase in the availability of the report. Howard Chapman suggested that all four of the faculty on the Search Committee be supplied with a copy; Jack Snapper recommended that at least Sarah Harding, the Law School faculty member on the committee, be supplied with a copy for the convenience of downtown-campus faculty. Phil agreed to recommend that change to the Search Committee in time for its next meeting. Geoff Williamson suggested that a specific wording be attached to that request, and he agreed to construct that wording. Bob Krawczyk asked that the Search Committee issue another status report soon; Phil said that there isn't much to report at this point. Several Council members expressed a wish that a more specific timetable for the search were available.

Restructuring within College of Engineering:
Phil announced a recent change in the organization of the College of Engineering, under which the faculty associated with Environmental Engineering will be moved administratively from the Chemical and Environmental Engineering Department to the Civil and Architectural Engineering Department. This will entail a change in the sponsorship of the graduate programs in environmental engineering.

Administrators' Reviews: Dean of College of Architecture and Director of the Institute of Psychology:
Phil said that the Provost has asked the Faculty Council to provide names of ad hoc faculty committees to review the performance of the Donna Roberson as Dean of the College of Architecture and Ellen Mitchell as Director of the Institute of Psychology. The rules for this kind of review are spelled out in Appendix E of the Faculty Handbook, and the construction of the committee is described in paragraph VI of that Appendix, which states,

There shall be no fewer than five faculty members, four of whom shall be from the constituency of the dean or director. Three or more appointments shall be made from a list of no fewer than six nominees prepared by the University Faculty Council in consultation with member groups of the dean's or director's constituency.

Appendix J Proceedings and Appointment of a Disciplinary Hearing Committee:
The University has initiated proceedings that could lead to dismissal of a specific faculty member, as set forth in Appendix J of the Faculty Handbook. The Provost is satisfied that the conditions set forth in paragraphs I through III of that Appendix have been met, and he has asked the University Faculty Council to assemble a Disciplinary Hearing Committee according to the Provisions of Paragraph IV. Noreen Kozak has accordingly assembled a complete list of Category I and Category II faculty, so that Phil can make a random selection of candidates. Phil did the random selection in the sight of the entire Council at the meeting, and the following faculty members will be potential members of the Disciplinary Hearing Committee: Wei Zhang (BCPS), Jamal Yagoobi (MMAE), Bob Carlson (CS), Marco Saraniti (ECE), Paul Pettigrew (ARCH), Matt Bauer (CS), Michael Gorham (Kent), Sudakhar Nair (MMAE), Steve Sowle (Kent), Pat Corrigan (PSYC), Jialing Xiang (BCPS), Chris White (BCPS), and Tom Brock (ARCH). As specified in Paragraph IV of Appendix J, Phil will meet with these thirteen people and determine whether they are in fact eligible to serve. The actual committee will consist of five faculty members drawn from this group, together with administration members.

Course Evaluations:
Phil reiterated the importance of dealing with the Course Evaluation question that the Council considered in December, but the Council decided to defer action until a later meeting.

Proposed Modification of IIT's Grading Scheme:
Andy Howard distributed a proposal to form an ad hoc committee to explore the feasibility of changing IIT's grading scheme from the current (A, B, C, [D], E) system to one that includes plus and minus grades (e.g., A, A-, B+, B, ...). The Council engaged in a lively debate both about the merits of the idea and how to explore it. Many Council members felt that substantial student input would be required in this consideration, since students will be affected substantially by any change in the current system. Jason Tenenbaum affirmed that students would be very interested in participating in a discussion of this issue. The suggestion was made that the committee should focus on the academic appropriateness of a change; the implementational details, including how much it would cost to make the change, should be examined after the academic issues have been dealt with. Nonetheless, the Council agreed that it would be useful to get input from the Registrar's office or the Educational Services office about the logistics of a change. Jack Snapper said proposals of this kind have come forward to the Undergraduate Studies Committee several times in his experience; while the idea has been put to a vote, no positive vote has ever come forward from that Committee to the Council. He said that in many instances these proposals have foundered over details, such as determining the point-values of the plus and minus grades, and whether D- or E+ grades would be issued. Andy suggested that the ad hoc committee itself could study these questions in its effort. If the committee concludes that the change should be made only at the undergraduate level, then the committee could report out to the Undergraduate Studies Committee; if it decides that the change should include graduate courses and / or graduate students, then the committee should report back to the Faculty Council directly. After additional discussion, Geoff Williamson proposed that Andy Howard, Jack Snapper, and Jason Tenenbaum be charged with assembling the committee and reporting back to the Council on its makeup. Ali Emadi seconded this suggestion, and it was approved by consensus. Andy said he would e-mail the proposed membership of the ad hoc committee back to the Council.

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 2:05pm.