COMMITTEE: Academic Awards Committee
MEETING DATE: Feb. 6, 2003
PERSON PRESIDING: Jeffery Phipps, Chair
REGULAR MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE: Rose Allen, Ellen Arnold, Chuck Boklage, Sylvie Henning, Gregory Lapicki
EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE: Justin Mallarkey
OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE: Lori Lee
ACTIONS OF MEETING
Agenda Item: Approval of Dec. 5, 2002 Minutes
Discussion: None
Action Taken: Minutes approved
Agenda Item: Report from Dorothy Clayton on videotaping of award nominees
Discussion: Dot was unable to attend the meeting, so Chair Phipps presented her emailed report:, as follows:
I spoke with Dennis Cali, Interim Chair of the Department of Communications and Broadcasting. I asked about getting access to Tom McQuaid (Tom used to do the taping for the awards but was re-assigned to Communications and Broadcasting), but we are not able to do that. The taping for the Board of Governors Award for Excellence in Teaching was primarily done by the University Multimedia Center. In those cases where the center did not do it, the taping was done by colleagues of the faculty member nominated. The taping for nominees from the Health Sciences Division was done by the Center for Health Sciences Communication. A committee member of the selection committee for the BOG Award for Excellence in Teaching commented that there was a noticeable difference between the professional quality of the tapes done by the Center for Health Sciences Communication and the other videotapes. I do not think we will be able to resolve this matter prior to the taping of the finalists for the Robert L. Jones Award for Outstanding Teaching and the University Award for Outstanding Teaching. My suggestion is that those faculty members who were double nominees for the BOG Award for Excellence in Teaching and the Outstanding Teaching awards be allowed/encouraged to use the same tape for the Outstanding Teaching award as the one they used for the BOG Award for Excellence in Teaching. I have those tapes and will certainly make them available. If someone is really dissatisfied with that tape and wants to have another tape made, they should have that option. The person to speak with about using David Jones in the Multimedia Center is Laurie Godwin, Director of the Center. If Laurie agrees, when you communicate with the finalists, it is important to stress with them that they must give David and the center several days notice because he is juggling this along with his other duties. . . .. I will continue to supply the videotapes.
Agenda Item: Reports from Teaching and Research Award Subcommittees
Discussion: Hanna Jubran was absent, but submitted a statement that his subcommittee (BOG Distinguished Teaching award) will meet next week to make their selection.
Chuck Boklage reported on the situation regarding the Lifetime Achievement Award. The Medical School had submitted two applications, but each unit is allowed only one. Boklage took the problem to Dean Kragel of the Medical School, and a decision was made by the Medical School to submit one of the applicants and drop the other. Dean Kragel raised the question as to whether the second applicant for the Lifetime Achievement Award might be nominated for the Five Year Award, but he did not follow through on this. Dr. Boklage asked if the committee might make this move, since there are two Five Year awards and only one applicant total. After some discussion among committee members, it was decided that such an action would not be a fair one to other candidates, and that it would be suggested to the second applicant for the Lifetime award that he reapply next year. After brief discussion of the issue of whether a Five Year Award might be made when there was only one applicant, it was determined that, if this applicant meets the criteria, the applicant should receive the award. The second Five Year award will not be given. The subcommittee will meet to review the applicant next week. Justin Mallarkey, who is serving on this subcommittee, expressed concern that he is being asked to vote on applicants when he does not feel qualified to make such decisions. Dr. Boklage and Rose Allen assured him that student input is important to the committee and it is part of the committee’s responsibility to see that student participants are educated about the process and criteria; Mallarkey was also advised that he could abstain from voting in situations where he did not feel comfortable doing so.
Jeff Phipps and Rose Allen reported that the BOG Excellence in Teaching subcommittee has reviewed the 11 submitted portfolios and has sent its first choice to the Chancellor; there was a deadlock over the Alternate, so two names were sent up as Alternate choices.
Action Taken: none
Agenda Item: Need for March meeting
Discussion: The March meeting occurs during Spring Break. It was decided that there will be no March meeting, unless there is a problem with the videotaping situation that needs to be addressed.
Agenda Item: Other business
Discussion: Rose Allen brought up Provost Swart’s visit to the committee in the Fall, during which he outlined several things he suggested that the committee might consider. Those included the following:
1. Creation of a new teaching award to recognize improvement in teaching - This would fall under the purview of the Academic Awards Committee. The Committee could decide to formulate procedures for such an award, obtain funding and present something to the Faculty Senate for their consideration. A change to the Committee's charge might also be necessary to include this activity.
2. Change faculty orientation to include a weekly seminar to help new faculty succeed at teaching - Both divisions of Academic Affairs and Health Sciences oversee the faculty orientation activities each Fall. This is something that the Provost can request to have done within his own office. Of course, the Committee could draft a memorandum to him stating support for such an event.
3. Consider developing materials to improve teaching effectiveness - This may fall under Dorothy Clayton's area within the Faculty Development Center. The Committee could discuss this with her to find out what she thinks is needed. The Academic Standards Committee is actually charged with "...recommending policies to improve and advance faculty teaching...."
4. Consider possible support from Carnegie Foundation for Teaching and Learning - This is an area that the Committee could explore in relation to support of a new teaching award.
Allen suggested we might need to review the requests, determine which committees these would fall to, and write them a letter passing on the new Provost’s requests.
Assigned additional duties to: These suggestions will be discussed in the April meeting.
NEXT MEETING: April 3, 2003
ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED:
Approval of Feb. 6, 2003 minutes
Success of videotaping of award nominees
Subcommittee Reports
Suggestions to committee from Provost Swart
