RSS Icon Twitter icon Facebook icon

Intercampus Faculty Council Agendas Tuesday, December 16, 2003

President’s Conference Room

Columbia
9:30 a.m. IFC members
  1. Call to order.
  2. Approval of November 21 , 2003 minutes.
  3. Approval of December 16, 2003 agenda.
  4. Major Discussion Items
10:30 a.m. Vice President Lehmkuhle, Associate Vice President Graham
& Faculty Fellow Wilden to join the meeting

1. Discussions with Vice President Lehmkuhle

12:00 p.m. LUNCH

President Floyd and other Vice Preisdents to join the meeting

Campus Reports

Discussions with President Floyd and other Vice Presidents

1:00 p.m. Continued discussion of agenda items
2:00 p.m. Adjourn
Major Discussion Items
  1. Board of Curators meeting at UMKC, December 10-12, 2003. Review of recent newspaper trails. Update on the process towards a decision on consolidation of President and Chancellor positions. Review of draft letter by Waterborg.
  2. Information from VP S. Lehmkuhle on the response of Chief Academic Officers towards FAS implementation. Discuss the timeline of implementation and action by the team proposed by VP R. Caruso to represent the users-group, including Christensen, Hilgers, Pierce and Waterborg.
  3. Information from E. Porter and VP S. Lehmkuhle on the progress towards a draft for a single workload policy. Identify the IFC workgroup representative from UMR. Plan meeting of the IFC workgroup (Porter, Pierce, Waterborg, UMR representative) with on CAO and VP Lehmkuhle.
  4. Tuition -freeze Bill proposal in Legislature [Christensen, Devaney].
  5. UMKC Senate Resolution on restoring UM Award levels [Schweitzberger].
  6. If progress has been made by UM Academic Affairs and Human Resources: Continued discussion on academic title reform, rights and responsibilities, and length of contract for contingent faculty. Confirmation of date and sponsoring by the faculty governance councils on all campuses of the Spring 2004 UMC forum on the rights and responsibilities of contingent faculty.
  7. Should IFC initiate the discussion towards establishing a workload policy or workload expectations for other groups than regular faculty? Such groups could be faculty currently not covered by CRR policies (see preceding Agenda point), and non-academic, administrative units.
  8. Discuss further the idea of a possible administrative audit, including what is currently done and what could or should be done. Discuss with VP K. Hutchinson (Human Resources) the possibilities to identify from UM data those persons who are partially or fully ‘administration’ and ‘support staff’.
Update items:
  1. Update on any significant actions in Program Audit on the campuses.
Agenda items (as time permits)
  1. Discuss process differences in tenure policies across the four campuses.
  2. Academic Dishonesty.
  3. “Rule of 85” retirement as option to prevent disruptive VERIP actions.
  4. Will IFC start a policy initiative forbidding Consensual Relationships between faculty and students?
NEXT MEETING DATE: Wednesday, January 21, 2004

Reviewed 2010-07-16.