College of Business Faculty Meeting

1
Welcome

• College of Business Faculty Meeting
• November 14, 2005

2
Agenda

• Announcements
• What the FEC is currently working on.
• Old Business
• Information on journal lists
• New Business
• Curriculum Committee proposal-- additional majors
  in the joint Engineering M.S. / MBA program.
• Outcomes committee structure statement addition
  to charter - FEC motion
• PT issues - (a) time frame and (b) addition of
  departmental committee section (V) to college
  document - FEC motions
• NTT addition to charter - FEC motion
• Outcomes process - outcomes committee motion
• Good of the Order
• Discussion relating to college awards

3
AnnouncementsWhat is the FEC up to?

• PT document
• Do we need policy on adding or deleting materials
  from a candidates dossier?
• Do we need a standard letter for external
  reviewers?
• Do we need a policy for identifying and selecting
  outside reviewers?
• Policy on voting in departmental committees
• PT document and FEC charter accuracy
• Hiring of faculty who has the authority to hire
  faculty members?
• Recruiting/inviting to campus?
• Faculty involvement?
• Making public the terms of department chairs
• Journal list next slide
• Administrator evaluations in spring
• Other items or requests?
• writing

4
Old Business - Journal lists

• We have asked department chairs to facilitate
  development of lists for each department request
  was made in Cabinet, and is reiterated at this
  general faculty meeting
• We will continue building big list based on
  objective criteria
• Citation impact/rates, inter-disciplinary
  rankings/publications, rankings by other COBs,
  accreditation groups, and other?
• John and Jim have created a preamble
• To ensure that the process is inclusive. FEC
  plans to hold and facilitate a series of brown
  bag conversations on the progress of the
  development of the list. 
• First Brown-Bag is November 30, at noon in room
  3164

5
Cabinet Minutes January 4, 2005

• one of the main tasks of the FEC spring semester
  will be to develop a college-wide list of journal
  rankings that can be used in PT evaluations and
  annual reviews. The primary reason for this list
  is to create a standard that can be used across
  the college in evaluation processes resulting in
  a more consistent application/interpretation of
  journal quality and impact. The FEC will seek
  input from all faculty in this process heavy
  reliance on externally valid criteria (e.g.,
  citation indexes, acceptance rates, etc.) will
  help to develop a standard that is not based
  solely on opinions but on interdisciplinary
  objective criteria commonly accepted and agreed
  upon. Further, the list will consider journals in
  specialty areas and teaching. Cabinet was very
  supportive of this effort indicating that this
  list would help to ensure all faculty
  publications are treated equitably in evaluation
  processes.

6
From page 4 PT Document

• Indicators of quality research include, but are
  not limited to, the following
• Publication in the leading/top-tier journals
  (based on documented ranking) of ones
  discipline.
• Publication in journals read by peers who do
  similar research.
• Publication of academic monographs and books.
• Leadership and individual contributions in
  research scholarship.
• Frequent citation of ones papers.
• Obtaining external peer-reviewed grants for
  research and successful completion of them.
• Presentation of papers at national and
  international conferences.
• Editor, associate editor or member of editorial
  board of major journals in ones discipline.
• Awards and recognition for ones research
  achievements from peers beyond the college and
  university.
• Creation of intellectual property

7
Preamble

• The College of Business journal list is a
  collective and collegial effort to arrive at a
  reasonable agreement as to what constitutes
  a visible and generally recognized list of
  journals across all the business disciplines.
• Among the objectives of this list are
• a) to provide a guide enabling faculty to
  optimize their research efforts so as to make the
  widest impact and contribution to the business
  disciplines,
• b) to provide support for faculty going up for
  tenure/promotion so that colleagues from across
  the business disciplines will have a ready
  reference as to what are generally deemed to be
  the recognized and impactful journals,
• c) to provide the basis for colleagues across
  college departments so they can periodically and
  continuously evaluate and track the direction of
  their disciplines and their top journals, with an
  eye on the newer journals in new/emerging,
  integrative, and sub-fields in the business
  disciplines. In other words, the list is not
  static but an ongoing effort to revise, add, or
  delete from the existing list.  Further, each
  department has the prerogative to develop its own
  list for the same purposes.
• The genesis of this journal list is drawn from
  the College mandate contained in the College PT
  document and Cabinet Minutes, and includes a wide
  variety of sources from published and widely used
  indices such as the SSCI, etc., to lists
  developed and used in comparable peer
  institutions.  The process utilized for this
  exercise is to draw from the collective wisdom,
  standards of excellence, and experience of the
  broadest collection of peers across similar
  institutions.
• Based on externally valid criteria indicated
  above, the current list represents a set of
  visible journals college faculty should target as
  publication outlets. Publishing in these
  journals will enhance the reputation of the
  college within the academic community.

8
New Business College Curriculum Committee

• Curriculum Committee proposal-- additional majors
  in the joint Engineering M.S. / MBA program.

9
Curriculum item

• Item passed with voice vote

10
New Business - The FEC proposes that the
following be added to the FEC charter

• 9. Outcomes Assessment Committee
• a. Reports to the Faculty.
• b. Membership one tenured/tenure-track or NTT
  faculty (with college voting rights) member
  representing each of the current undergraduate
  majors appointed by the Dean and the department
  chairs an Associate Dean serves as a non-voting
  member.
• c. Chair Elected by voting members of the
  committee.
• d. Term of voting members Faculty, two-year
  staggered (i.e., no more than four new members
  appointed in any one year).
• e. Responsibilities
• Oversee college and departmental assessment
  processes for both undergraduate and graduate
  curricula
• Aid in the on-going development of direct
  outcomes assessment measures
• Consolidate, evaluate, and monitor assessment
  data within the College
• Communicate assessment information with
  Curriculum Committee, faculty and administration
• Log/monitor actions taken by faculty in response
  to outcomes assessment

11
Outcomes item action

• Item passed with voice vote
• Will be added to charter

12
New Business - The FEC proposes the following
amended time frame be included in the college PT
document in Appendix One - in place of the
current version

• April 15- Candidate submits letter of intent and
  list of potential external reviewers. Chair
  informs department of candidate intent.
• May 1 - Candidate submits personal statement,
  curriculum vitae, portfolio and supporting
  materials to department chair for departmental
  PT review.
• Before May 15- Departmental PT committee meets
  to create their list of external reviewers and to
  select list of reviewers who will be asked to
  write letters request for external letters
  initiated, asking those letters to be returned by
  around August 15th.
• Before October 1- Departmental committee reviews
  to Chair
• November 1- Departmental committee review and
  department chair reports to College Committee
• December 15- College PT committee submits report
  to the Dean

13
Timeline item

• Item sent back to FEC for revision

14
New Business - The FEC proposes that the current
college PT document, section V., be changed to
read as follows (bold text represents changes)

• V. Promotion and Tenure Committees
• A. College Committee - The primary responsibility
  of this committee is to review and evaluate
  faculty members being considered for tenure
  and/or promotion. The committee provides a
  written report evaluating the candidates
  performance in the areas identified in his/her
  PRS and makes a recommendation to the Dean of the
  faculty. A minority may issue a report. The
  committee also reviews and evaluates probationary
  faculty performance under the three-year review
  process.
• The committee is composed of tenured associate
  and full professors, one from each of the
  departments. Each year in the Fall, the
  department representative is chosen by all
  tenured faculty members of the department. The
  chairperson of the College PT Committee is
  elected by the members of the committee. Faculty
  holding administrative appointments cannot serve
  on this committee. All members of the committee
  participate in the discussion of (and vote on)
  all candidates.
• B. Departmental PT Committee - The primary
  responsibility of this committee is to review and
  evaluate faculty members being considered for
  tenure and/or promotion. The committee provides
  a written report evaluating the candidates
  performance in the areas identified in his/her
  PRS and makes a recommendation to the Department
  Chair. A minority may issue a report. The
  committee also reviews and evaluates probationary
  faculty performance under the three-year review
  process.
• The committee is composed of tenured associate
  and full professors. The chairperson of the
  Departmental PT Committee is elected by the
  members of the committee. Faculty holding
  administrative appointments cannot serve on this
  committee. All members of the committee
  participate in the discussion of all candidates.
  Departments with fewer than three tenured faculty
  eligible to vote at the departmental level must
  select and appoint a tenured member (or members)
  from outside the department (in consultation with
  the department chair), to bring the number of
  eligible voters to three.

15
PT item

• Sent back to FEC for revision

16
New Business - The FEC proposes adding the
following to the FEC charter

• V. College voting rights of Non-tenure-track
  Faculty Members
• NTT faculty with at least a ½ time appointment
  are eligible to vote on college and departmental
  initiatives in general faculty and departmental
  meetings, and in committees as specifically
  indicated in the standing committee charges that
  follow (Appendix A), but are excluded from voting
  on College PT issues and other issues
  exclusively pertaining to tenured/tenure-track
  faculty.

17
NTT item

• Item passed
• Will be added to charter

18
New Business Outcomes Assessment Committee

• Outcomes process - outcomes committee motion

19
Outcomes item

• Outcomes item passed
• Will be added to outcomes committee charter

20
New Business - College AwardsDiscussion

• Current
• Undergrad teaching
• Grad teaching
• Innovation in teaching
• Research
• Business Impact
• Service-staff
• Change
• Increase merit staff/PS awards
• Change faculty awards to mirror those of ISU

21
Cabinet Minutes - Awards

• The Cabinet has previously reviewed the annual
  college awards and recommended changes to the
  existing structure to more closely coincide with
  the Universitys award system. The FEC has
  considered the proposed changes as have some
  individual departments. After some discussion,
  it was decided to implement the following College
  awards four faculty awards structured more
  closely like those offered at the university
  level -- hence we will have a teaching award and
  a research award for junior faculty (what the
  university calls "early achievement") and for
  senior faculty (what the university calls
  "outstanding achievement") 2 PS awards and 2
  merit awards. The FDC will be asked to develop
  nomination criteria and process, and the Staff
  Development Committee will be asked to provide
  input regarding the staff awards.

22
Request

• Every faculty member in every class provide some
  sort of written assignment for students
• Meaningful
• With feedback