Minutes of Faculty Council Meeting: May 12, 1998

The meeting was called to order at 3:45 by John Kolena. Guests in attendance included Steve Warshaw, Sally Adkin, and John Friedrick.

Announcements:

Steve Warshaw announced that we would not be running the parking shuttle for Commencement. With the smaller graduating class, there should be adequate parking in and around campus.

Gail Hudson announced the result of the vote to modify the evaluation procedure for next year. While only 21 faculty voted, all of the items passed. The Evaluation Committee will incorporate these changes into the Faculty Evaluation Procedures and submit them to Dr. Warshaw by June 1.

Agenda Items:

1. SGA Representation on the Faculty Council.

While no student representative was present to make a presentation, John Kolena informed the body that the SGA has drafted a proposal asking for representation on the Faculty Council. John indicated that they would like to elect 2 representatives to attend meetings of the Faculty Council. He felt like the students wanted to be a part of the discussions that they perceive start in Faculty Council. They did not mention the voting status of these representatives. Some faculty felt that the presence of students at all meetings might stifle frank discussions. As adults we say things to each other in the process of hashing out decisions that we fear students might take the wrong way. We are often acting in a more parental role, and need a forum to have "parental" discussions. There are times when parents, or those acting in the role of parents, need to have discussions away from those in their charge. It was the feeling of those present that we should invite students to attend more of our meetings. We have appreciated their input this year and probably need to seek their input more often, but we also need times when they are not present. It was suggested that student liaisons meet on a more formal and regular basis with Faculty Council officers. It was pointed out that if we close our meetings to students we would be the only body on campus to have "closed" meetings.

2. Alternate Accreditation Procedures (Tom Trocano & Steve Warshaw)

Tom reported that Kentsville High School in Virginia Beach was in their fifth year of the School Renewal procedure. One of the assumptions in implementing this procedure is that the school has site-based management in practice. Schools must report each year on their progress. Another assumption that is made is that faculty are able to and can make decisions to implement those things they want to change. The faculty and administration decide what to change and how to evaluate this change. This process mandates total staff participation and the willingness of the administration to implement needed changes. The process begins with an on-site readiness visit. If we meet criterion, we can use this process. Five major areas, 24 sub topics, all must be evaluated. We must show (based on our criterion) progress in each area. As this is a continual process, the enthusiasm at Kentsville waned in the later years of the process.

Steve reported on the Senior High School Improvement Process. He reported that (1) while we do have to meet certain standards, there is no checklist. Forms and surveys are available, but we are not required to use theirs. (2) The process is more focused on the end product and less on the actual process. SACS is looking for measurable changes.

Steve asked for a vote for a recommendation to take to the Board of Trustees. A motion was made and seconded that we select the first process, School Renewal. The motion passed 24 for and 1 against.

3. B.O.T. Committee Reports: Gretchen Skidmore reported that John Thomas is the new chair of the Fiscal Planning and Development Committee. Their meetings are 8:30 prior to Board meetings and he welcomes all visitors to these meetings. His goals are to look at the long range needs for funding and fiscal planning. He hopes that he and the members of his committee will be more approachable and would like to be invited to more school activities.

Dot Doyle reported that the Educational Policies and Practices Committee is currently looking at two items, admissions and the Fairness and Diversity Report.

Julie Graves asked for clarification on her assignment to present to the Personnel

Committee. She is to ask for clarification from the board concerning non-

renewal on basis of performance. It appears that faculty could appeal non-renewal of contract based on a good performance record. The Faculty would like such a statement included in our personnel documents.

4. Fairness and Diversity: John Friedrick stated that we (the entire NCSSM community) are somewhat vulnerable after this report. We have the opportunity to make some major improvements. The report called for "truce" between faculty and administration. John stated that is it important for us to find a way to disagree, in a healthy way, that would not seem to the Board that we are unable to work together. Another issue raised in the report was the lack of trust. It came up in the last meeting of the Board that three faculty members had letters of reprimand in their personnel files for speaking openly about concerns. A check of the records found that only one such letter existed, and the Director announced that this letter was being removed. He hoped that this would put this issue behind us, and that we could move forward. Others who feel that they might have been reprimanded for speaking out should check their folder. Faculty need to have the freedom of speech. A June, 1995 board policy extends this freedom of speech to faculty. The Director hopes that by removing this letter of reprimand, we can begin to rebuild trust.

John Kolena reported on the May 1st Board Meeting at which the main topic was the report of the Fairness and Diversity Commission. The Board did not finish their review of the report and resulting recommendations. John reported on the vote of the Faculty Council concerning issues that we hope to address in response to this report. Several items are already being addresses and John asked for guidance in moving forward on the others. A concern was expressed that until we learn to work with each other, little progress would be made. Team building as a part of our professional development may be needed. Another issue that continues to be the current state of our technology on campus. Without a head of development and head of Information Technology, it is going to be difficult to move ahead quickly on this issue.

5. Admissions Re-visited:

Dot Doyle, in recalling a straw poll taken in Faculty Council concerning faculty involvement in recruitment, raised the issue that this might not be the best use of our time. She suggested that there might other ways to aid in the process, including manning booths at professional meetings, going along to help and talk to students and parents at regional testing sites, attending summer socials, writing to students from around the state who do well in competitions, and allowing candidates to visit our classes. John Friedrick stated that earlier contact with students is important. He suggested that we host more activities for younger students. We should also communicate with groups like PAGE that work with younger gifted students. Summer workshops for teachers are another important way for us to sell our school and program to teachers, who will then feel more confident recommending the school to their students. We have been unable to have as many summer workshops recently due to lack of funding. Steve Warshaw stated that he feels like there are teachers who with some training would make good recruiters.

The meeting adjourned at 5:10.

Respectfully submitted,

John Goebel, Secretary