Faculty Council Meeting of Tuesday, 2 October 2001
President: Joe Liles; Vice-president: John Woodmansee; Secretary: Floyd Bullard
Minutes
Announcements
Joan Barber pointed out that the “Supervised Study Enhancement Program” ends this week, and she wants feedback from everyone at a later Faculty Council meeting about how well it worked. She said there were a lot of indicators they were prepared to look at, and confounding variables that had to be considered because they were unavoidable.
After Joan’s announcement, Joe and several other people reported back on what had happened at the recent Board of Trustees meeting that happened last Friday. Joe reported that he told the Board this was the “year of thinking positively”, and that was evidently good news to them. He told them that we still have plenty of spirit and are giving our new Executive Director a chance. We know Jerry is different, that he likes to go fast, that we’re trying to be supportive, that we’re not trying to “win” anything at the school at the expense of other programs, etc. He told us that one trustee said it was the best BOT meeting he’d been to, ever. Joe then told us he hoped he wasn’t lying to the Board, that he hopes we will see positive results if we stay positive.
After Joe shared his report to the Board, Jerry did the same. His report was mostly about the budget and his vision for the school. We’re on the verge of getting budget flexibility, which will mean what it sounds like: we’ll have more freedom to divvy up our budget the way we want to. Jerry’s vision for the future includes boosting distance learning as an outreach tool, having greater collaboration with universities and community colleges (possibly transferring credits), and putting a building on the site where they tore down the old maintenance building. The ETC cost $10 million and Jerry estimated a price tag of $26 million for a complex to house a “genomics, robotics, hands-on discovery science center”, more science lab space, and other spaces for high-tech use.
Jerry told the Board about the GPA changes, and admitted that the decision had been made in the midst of some disagreement, but that the faculty had ultimately supported and not undermined the decision. He told them about plans for campus evacuation drills and other safety issues.
More about buildings. The former Wyche House will be renamed the Royal Center, and opening bids for renovation contracts are now coming in. Jerry’s vision as to the future use of that building: a “mixed-use building where students, faculty, and administration would all be in the same building.”
And the “Campus House” will be located on the vacant lot that’s to the left of the ETC as you face it, near the big old oak tree, which Jerry says they plan to preserve. In addition to being the Executive Director’s house, the building will be used for school functions like Board gatherings, gatherings of students, faculty, alumni, etc.
Mary Roberts reported that the Educational Policies and Practices Committee met and mostly got more detailed information about quality points and the GPA. No decisions were made.
Julie Graves reported on the Fiscal Planning and Human Resources Committee. Minutes were approved. Ed and Delacy added a little more saying that the committee discussed budget flexibility, a pay increase for EPA teachers, construction bids, and also a possible policy that could make the alcohol and drug abuse policy that now applies to students essentially apply to staff too. They said faculty contracts would be an action item at the next Board meeting.
Carol O’Dell talked about the Development Committee. The only action item for them was approval of minutes, but they talked about a big capital campaign, named The Odyssey, that they’re planning to kick off officially in January of 2003 and complete in 2005. Joe added that that committee has decided to name the athletic field after Branson Brown, with ceremonies to be held when next year when the class of ‘82 has its 20th reunion.
Joe ended all this Board talk by reminding everyone that Board liaisons were something that came out of a Faculty Council discussion of years past, and that we were fortunate to have them. The Board has liked it, and they treat us as peers. It’s an important step in bettering our faculty-trustee and faculty-administration relationships.
Agenda Item 1: Sharing by Fulbright Recipients:
Shlensky, Skidmore, Moose
Fulbright grants are available to teachers in all disciplines for summer travel and study. Three of our faculty—Jane Shlensky, Gretchen Skidmore, and Elizabeth Moose—have been awarded this grant, and they shared with us how beneficial they found the experience.
Jane spoke first. Few details are included in these minutes. Much information about Jane’s recent trip to India (and some of her other travels) can be found at her website: http://courses.ncssm.edu/shlensky/.
Gretchen next talked about her own Fulbright-funded trip to Africa. She quoted the first line of one of my favorite books, Out of Africa: “I had a farm in Africa, at the foot of the Ngong Hills…” She said she felt kind of like that. “I had a trip to Africa, where I learned that Africa looks like Africa, only the plants aren’t always friendly. I learned what explorers might have felt upon reaching Africa. I learned to play African drums. I learned how warm are the hearts of African people, many of whom took us in, shared their art, their children, their crafts, their songs….”
Elizabeth talked about her trip to Morocco in 1998. She said she cannot think of Muslim faces as the faces of Evil because she has stayed in a Muslim home. Also, that being a student again and sitting around a seminar table makes you sympathize with your own students more. She said that she realized why our students don’t get enough sleep: there’s just too much fun to be had from the pleasures of learning.
All three of these teachers said they’d be happy to talk with anyone who was interested in applying for a Fulbright and give them more information, or help them apply. Elizabeth also said that she wished that NCSSM would seriously examine the possibility of teacher sabbaticals: not to develop curriculum, but to get energized. Teaching drains a lot of energy.
Agenda Item 2: Report on Data from the Current Junior
Class
Steve Warshaw shared a lot of statistics about the current junior class. Overhead transparencies he showed us are copied at the end of these minutes. Next, he talked about the “watch list” students: those who came here with a C or a D on their transcript already, those with low SAT scores, and those who are enrolled in algebra here at NCSSM their junior year. Once again, the information he shared is at the end of these minutes. The most stand-out item in the data appears to the Faculty Council secretary to be that students with C’s and D’s at their old schools have a tendency to make C’s and D’s here as well. (Half of said students made a D at the end of their first semester here last year. Of the 66 students on this list, 7 withdrew last year, of whom 6 were on the list because of C’s and D’s at their former schools.)
Steve suggested that maybe we should have an index for admissions that isn’t entirely holistic. Someone else made the suggestion that admission to NCSSM should be contingent upon not making C’s or D’s in the last semester of their sophomore year.
The final tidbit was good news: minority student enrollment at NCSSM is up this year from last.
The Faculty Council meeting ended officially at 5:05.
Addendum: Information shared by Steve Warshaw via
overhead transparencies:
Class
'03 Admissions Results
05/07/01
769
688
303 FINALISTS
TOTAL
ATTENDED
(51 MINORITY)
APPLICATIONS
-----à
DISCOVERY -----à
85 WAIT LIST
DAY
(6 MINORITY)
Other relevant information:
Class
'03 Admissions Results
05/07/01
Class
0f
No. Applicants
1982
917
1983
672
1984
824
1985
824
1986
844
1987
831
1988
764
1989
759
1990
696
1991
707
1992
847
1993
867
1994
818
1995
844
1996
945
1997
886
1998
878
1999
773
2000
678
2001
654
2002
667
2003
769
Comparison of Academic Indicators: Students Invited ”Late” to All Finalists Class ‘02 (Students Who Declined Are Not Included in These Totals)
“Late
Admits”
Finalists Class ‘02
Number of students
15
278
Grades
All A’s
6
191
A’s
and B’s
8
80
Other
1
7
Median SAT
(Range)
1200 (1020-1430)
1280 (920-1600)
Below 1100
SAT
4/15
13/219
Class Rank
Number 1
0/8
69/249
Upper
5%
6/8
197/249
Comparison of Academic Indicators: Students Invited ”Late” to All Wait List Finalists and All Finalists Class ‘03 (Students Who Declined Are Not Included in These Totals)
“Late Admits”
W'List Finalists
All Finalists
Number of students
40
302
Grades
All A’s
4/37
145/296
A’s and B’s
27/37
134/296
Other
6/37
17/296
Median SAT
(Range)
1195
1250
(800-1430)
(800-1590)
Below 1100
SAT
10/38
43/296
Class Rank
Number 1
3/35
78/269
Upper 5%
16/35
206/269
Comparison of Academic Indicators: All Finalists Class '02 and ‘03 (Students Who Declined Are Not Included in These Totals)
Class '02
Class '03
Number of students
278
302
Grades
All A’s
191/278
145/296
A’s and B’s
80/278
134/296
Other
7/278
17/296
Median SAT
(Range)
1280 (920-1600)
1250 (800-1590)
Below 1100
SAT
13/219
43/296
Class Rank
Number 1
69/249
78/269
Upper 5%
197/249
206/269
Minority
Composition of Student Body
08/21/01
Year
% Minority
% Minority
Applicants
for
Composition of
Sr.
and Jr. Classes
Student Body
(10th
Day Enrollment)
1984-85
18.7
1985-86
18.3
1986-87
16.0
1987-88
15.1
1988-89
16.7
1989-90
14.4
16.5
1990-91
15.0
20.3
1991-92
19.3
23.6
1992-93
20.9
24.6
1993-94
18.4
21.9
1994-95
19.5
22.2
1995-96
22.1
21.7
1996-97
22.3
22.1
1997-98
23.0
21.3
1998-99
18.9
17.1
1999-00
18.2
14.1
2000-01
17.4
13.9
2001-02
17.6
15.2