Minutes for the Meeting of March 31, 2006

Attending: Peter Hlebowitsh (Chair), Saba Ali, Ellen Herman, Devery Mock, John Northup, and Chris Ogren

Minutes of Last Meeting: Read and approved

FAC Website Modifications: Peter reported that the FAC website found at: http://www.education.uiowa.edu/fac/index.html This site has undergone the following changes: 1) each member’s name is a hotlink to his/her email address; 2) an additional menu item that is an electronic “suggestions box;” and 3) there is an additional menu item “FAC initiatives.” Peter suggested that we encourage our program area faculty to look at the site.

Travel Reimbursement Issue: Peter reviewed his plan for discussing the travel reimbursement issue with the College’s Administrative Council. It was agreed that in his report he would reflect out of pocket expenses not by Program Area but globally and that faculty spend as much as $3,000 out of pocket dollars to attend yearly professional meetings. Peter will recommend that Travel Reimbursement be increased college-wide from the current $500 per faculty member to $1000 per year. Additionally, he will ask that the process for receiving additional funding within departments become more transparent (e.g., what needs to be done to receive additional funding).

ACT COE Million Dollar Grant: An email response from Tarrell Portman indicated that she had no additional information relative to how the ACT Million dollar grant would be spent. Saba Ali shared that she was on an initial committee that generated ideas for spending the grant funds but that there was no follow-up to that first meeting. With this information, Peter indicated that he will probe further to find out where the college is in the decision-making process.

Mid-Year Pay Raises: The FAC is hoping to learn more about the decision-making process in awarding mid-year raises as well as how the letter that was sent to all faculty was developed. Peter reported that during the recent college-wide meeting with Provost Hogan, the indirect mid-year pay raise question that was asked by Gail Boldt was clearly not addressed. Peter then asked FAC members present to share what they learned from their conversation with their DEO relative to: 1) who was involved in the decisions relative to raises, 2) what criteria was used in deciding who received a raise, and 3) who actually developed the content of the letter that faculty received. Results from DEO’s found no uniform response to questions 1 & 2. In some cases it was reported that the Dean made all decisions based on the previous year’s merit recommendations while others reported that the Dean in consultation with the chair made the decisions based on “compression” issues. Relative to question 3, it was learned that several Deans across campus complained to Hogan about the wording of the letter but that he mandated much of the letter’s content. Following much discussion it was decided that this topic needed to be investigated and discussed further at the next meeting.

New business: Saba Ali inquired as to whether Provost Hogan’s comment about being “creative” might be applied to faculty release time for those who are working on large grant applications (as is the norm in other colleges such as Engineering). Particularly since these applications are very time-consuming and not always successful. There was some discussion with consensus that in this college release time decisions seem to be idiosyncratic dependent upon DEO and that if awarded it is only after receiving the grant.

Respectfully submitted,
Ellie Herman, FAC Secretary, 2005-2006