Minutes of the December 2006

Faculty Meeting

Opening

The meeting was called to order by President Anderson at 11: 33.

Pastor Benson opened the meeting with prayer

The minutes of the November 2006 faculty meeting were approved.

President’s Remarks

President Anderson observed that it was a wonderful time of the year, and that even if faculty were feeling overwhelmed with grading, everyone should be proud of the extraordinary fact that Christmas festival weekend had brought over twelve thousand people to campus to observe and participate in the life of the college. He extended thanks to faculty, staff, and students for all of their work. He added that he had only received one six page e-mail from an alumni, which had included extensive helpful comments on the meatballs that had been served at the cafeteria, and how they might be improved.

President Anderson next related that Michael Kyle had reported to him that the Office of Admissions was doing very well. If current trends continue through the month of December, in fact, he said that applications will have increased by forty percent over the last two years. To date, they had 4200 applicants for approximately 730 spots. The goal, he added, was to hit and sustain around 5000 applicants a year. He noted that 118 students have been admitted on an early admission basis, and reported that the academic profile and quality of these admits will be equal to the profile and quality of the admits of the regular class. Finally, he mentioned two surprising and welcome trends in the growth of the admissions pool. First, the growth in the number of out-of-state students was proportionally higher than the growth in the number of in-state students. Second, there was a proportional increase among qualified male applicants.

The President then turned in his remarks to the topic of fund raising. He reported that $20.4 million in gifts and pledges had been raised for the science complex to date, and that another $.6 million could be counted on with a high level of certainty. To reach the goal for the end of January, therefore, it would be necessary to raise another $1 million. Last Friday, he reported, “we broke ground with glee and certainty,” taking aim at the initial goal of finishing phase one of the project by the fall of 2008. He noted that it would be nice to go ahead and raise the additional $12 million by July 1 st of 2007 so that the entire building would not have to be split up into phases.

The President then reported on the Board of Regents’ meeting over the past weekend. The biggest topic of discussion, he said, was what the fees would be next year, and on that topic, they had made a resounding decision not to decide at this point because the extraordinary raise in applicants could affect their decision. In relation to the topic, the President noted that St. Olaf still admits students on a “rolling admissions” model, a model that has been replaced by the “precipice” model among most colleges of St. Olaf’s caliber. He explained that some of the advantages of the “precipice” model included the benefit of knowing what everyone’s need was before admitting anyone, and that for this reason, among others, a serious discussion had been going on about moving the college to the “precipice” model. If the college decides to adopt the new model, he noted, it could anticipate a drop in the admissions yield for the first year, so the applicant pool should be sufficiently strong in order to sustain that drop in the initial years.

Finally, the President mentioned that in his opinion, effective boards should work at a high level and focus their resources and brain power on a few topics. He said that the two word phrase that should characterize their thinking was “Main Things.” He clarified that this focus was not a sub-rosa reconstruction of the strategic plan, but simply a way of focusing attention. The St. Olaf Board’s three “Main Things,” he said, were: 1) maintaining and propelling the academic excellence of the college; 2) maintaining and propelling the sense of community that distinguishes St. Olaf; 3) sustaining the financial stability of the college over the long term.

Questions about the President’s Remarks

Gary Stansell noted that their had been a recent article in the Star Tribune about problems with town-gown relations in Northfield, particularly among students who lived off-campus, and wondered if this was a concern that might relate to the second “Main Thing.”

President Anderson responded, saying that, generally, he did not consider it desirable for students to live off-campus. Unfortunately, he remarked, the college currently has more students than beds. To address this over the long term, the college can either build another dorm or admit fewer students. He noted that he favored the latter course of action.

In relation to the issue of students living off-campus, Matt Rohn asked that the college’s web pages that address the possibility of living off-campus be revisited and revised.

With respect to the possible move toward the “precipice” model of admission, DeAne Lagerquist asked whether it would change the way the college thought about selectivity and need-blind admissions.

President Anderson responded by saying that the college practices need-sensitive admissions, and that it is not planning to move away from that practice, although, it should frankly be admitted that whatever model one adopts, there are some students who will not be admitted because the college cannot afford to meet their needs. On the “precipice” model, admissions would be enabled to make such decisions with all relevant information in front of it. Thus, he said, he understands the “precipice” model as a way to help the college be need-sensitive in a more responsible and controlled manner.

Committee Reports

 Jill Dietz, chair of CEPC, reported that the committee had been discussing the family and social service program, the college’s grading practices, and governance issues, more specifically, the value of having a single committee responsible for oversight of the college curriculum and educational policies. She further reported that the committee had been discussing the multicultural studies requirement with the help of a report penned by Carolyn Anderson and Tom Williamson, which would be made available to the entire faculty soon.

Matt Richey, chair of RPC, reported that the committee had a draft proposal on the issue of stopping the tenure clock, on which the committee was accepting input from the faculty, and that they hoped to bring a final proposal to the faculty in the spring. He further reported that, together with CEPC, they had been working on restructuring the curriculum committee and a student life committee, and that they also hoped to also draft proposals on these early in the spring. He added that the committee would probably need more time to complete its work on other two issues -- tenure and promotion and faculty development – but assured the faculty that the committee was continuing to work on these issues. Finally, he reminded the faculty that the committee had been charged with the task of working together with Alan Norton on salary issues, especially the task of constructing a formula for the distribution of faculty salary. He mentioned that last year’s model involved differentiations at several levels, including differences between long-term continuing and non-long-term continuing faculty, and between different ranks. He noted that there are many different models available to the faculty, and that because the committee needs to make a recommendation by February 15 th, it is eager to discuss and receive input. He stated that the Board’s target was to reach the 80 th percentile of the AAUP salary guidelines for all ranks, and said that the goal was attainable, but would only be realized with concentrated effort.

Lagerquist asked the committee to consider the salary paid per-course to adjuncts, a salary that she didn’t think had been raised in some time.

Margaret O’Leary, faculty observer to the Board of Regents, then reported on the most recent Regents-Faculty Conference meeting. The morning of the last meeting, she related, had consisted of committee meetings, during which she and other members of the faculty had met with the Board’s Academic Affairs Committee, where they discussed the college’s two-year theme. This went well, she reported, and the Board had welcomed more discussion, and the possibility of further educational experiences that might benefit Board members. The afternoon of the meeting, she reported, consisted of a corporate meeting, where much of the discussion focused on the science complex.

New Business

 Judy Stromayer, on behalf of the Nominating Committee, requested that the seven-day rule be waived, so that the faculty could elect a Social Sciences representative to the Tenure and Promotion Committee. The motion to waive the rule passed, and the ballots were distributed, marked, and collected.

Open Agenda

Bob Entemann mentioned that Rita Glazebrook had had to resign her position on the Tenure and Promotion Committee because her son had been wounded in Iraq. He stated that there is a fund that people can donate to help with redesigning costs on her son’s house, and that he would forward relevant information.

Jeanine Grenberg noted that the faculty could expect an increase in the number of drunken rodents on campus, since Shelly Dickinson had received a faculty development release-time grant. She related that Greg Muth, from Chemistry, had also received a grant. Grenberg added that for the second time in three years, the committee had received no applications from tenured faculty, and noted that she would be grateful if someone would help her figure out why more applications were not being submitted.

Anne Von Bibra reminded members of the faculty that they were invited to community dance events, noting that the swing club would be teaching the Shim Sham in February.

Bryn Geffert pleaded with the faculty to contact legislators about legislation currently under discussion that dealt with the cost of scientific literature and the possibility of making it free and available over the internet, after being published.

Judy Strohmeyer announced that Naurine Lennox had emerged victorious in the election, and therefore would be the new Social Sciences representative on the Tenure and Promotion Committee.

The meeting was adjourned at 12:35.

Respectfully Submitted,
Jamie Schillinger