IFC 3/6/07 Minutes
Not Yet Approved
Faculty Council Minutes (“IFC”): March 6,
2007
Wynne Courtroom, Inlow Hall (“IH 100”): 3:00 – 5:00 pm
Original
agenda follows adjournment as attachment.
Agenda Item I: Call to Order: Rosalie Vermette (IUPUI
Faculty Vice-President, 4.0064).
Vermette called the
meeting to order at 3:00pm.
Agenda Item II: Adoption of the Order of Business for the Day.
The agenda was adopted as the
order of business for the day.
Hearing no objections, the 2/20/07 IFC minutes (http://www.iupui.edu/~fcouncil/minutes/fc070220html.htm)
were approved as written and entered into record.
Bantz briefed the faculty on the following:
·
On March 5th,
IUPUI sponsored six different events for President-Elect Michael McRobbie. The turn-out in all venues was impressive, he
noted, and the Chancellor thanked Interim Vice Chancellor Amy Conrad Warner and
her team for their outstanding work putting together these events so quickly. President-Elect McRobbie will be attending a
similar series of events on each of IU’s eight campuses. Additionally, he will return to IUPUI next
week and the week after to meet with the Solution Center Conference and IFC
Executive Committee, respectively.
·
Both the Men’s
and Women’s basketball teams lost their respective conference tournament
semifinal games [on March 5th].
Bantz congratulated both teams on their seasons.
·
The search for
the Vice Chancellor for External Affairs continues, with the committee
currently recommending candidates for interview.
·
The
administration is consulting faculty and staff governance to establish the
search committee for Vice Chancellor for Administration and Finance Bob
Martin’s successor. Recently, Bantz explained, IUPUI hosted two visitors who
reviewed the portfolio for the Vice Chancellor’s position and will soon issue a
report to help inform the search process.
·
Chancellor Bantz
reminded the IFC that next year will be his fifth and that, per the Chancellor
Review Policy adopted by the Board of Trustees, he will be up for review. He reminded the IFC of faculty
concerns—especially at the University Faculty Council (“UFC”) level—about the
final version of the policy adopted by the Trustees. Bantz explained that he feels it his critical
that we remain mindful of these concerns and communicate about them as openly
as possible throughout the process.
·
The Indiana
General Assembly is in session and the university remains watchful of relevant
policy and budgetary developments. The
Life Sciences Initiative has had a high profile this session and both the
Chancellor and President-Elect McRobbie applaud Craig Brater for his
outstanding statewide advocacy for the initiative. One of the larger concerns facing IU this
session is the issue of state-set tuition.
Bantz said that the challenge to the university is two-fold: the state
being permitted to set tuition and at what level they would set it. Bantz will continue to update the IFC on this
pressing issue.
·
The campus budget
review process is nearing its conclusion, Bantz reported, with Academic Affairs
being the only remaining hearing on the schedule. He thanked the IFC Budgetary Affairs and
Campus Planning Committees for their contributions and participations to the
hearings. He believes that these
hearings have been the most productive in recent history.
·
Thomas Martz (BS
Science, IUB ’72) was appointed [March 6th] as the new President of
the IU Alumni Association (succeeding Ken
Beckley and John Hobson). Martz
will take office on April 1st.
Agenda Item V: Updates/Remarks from the
IFC President: Bart Ng (IUPUI Faculty President & UFC Co-Secretary, 4.8185, bng@math.iupui.edu).
Ng briefed the Council on the following:
·
The open letter
from the IUPUI faculty to the Board of Trustees and President-Elect (Circular IFC-2007-02: http://www.iupui.edu/~fcouncil/documents/openletter.htm)
continues to generate interest, including two articles appearing in the Indianapolis Star and local TV
exposure. The letter was even taken into
account by President-Elect McRobbie in his recent acceptance speech. By all indications, Ng said, “McRobbie is
really trying to listen.”
·
The IFC will aim
to meet with the President-Elect in April.
·
At their March
meeting, Ng continued to try to impress upon Trustees that, when IUPUI proposes
a new academic program, that proposal deserves an objective hearing and
legitimate debate.
·
Constitution
& Bylaws Chair Henry Karlson recently gave a presentation to the IFC
Executive Committee (“IFC-EC”) regarding the issue of non-tenure-track faculty
representation [on the IFC], including the impact and implications of offering
different types of representation to this group. He also spoke to the complexity of seeking an
amendment to the Constitution of the IU Faculty (the document containing the
language that nullified the IFC’s initial attempt to codify voting rights for
non-tenure-track faculty). Ng explained that, while the IFC-EC appreciates the
complexities and challenges Karlson has presented, there is sincere interest in
granting some form of representation on the IFC to non-tenure-track
faculty. Ng hopes to discuss this issue
with the UFC this Spring. Further
discussion at the IFC level is forthcoming.
·
After Ng
concluded his report, Vice President Vermette thanked Amy Conrad Warner for her
tireless effort to engage faculty in events and meetings surrounding
President-Elect McRobbie’s appointment.
Agenda Item VI: Question/Answer
Period.
IFC members posed the following questions:
Linda
Adele Goodine asked about the impact of President Herbert’s recent announcement
regarding system and core schools on the IUPUI campus. Chancellor Bantz replied that it is not
completely clear and that he and President Herbert have not spoken since the
report was made. The Chancellor is
sensitive to the fact that many are very concerned and plans to express those
concerns to the President. He further
explained that the President has made a number of recommendations recently that
will come before the Board of Trustees at the April meeting; among them is a
recommendation to eliminate the system school as a concept, except in the cases
of Medicine (due to its multiple locations across the state) and Social Work
(due to accreditation issues).
The
President’s recommendations on core schools focused on Education and
Journalism. In fact, the President’s
statement—that the Indianapolis Journalism program should remain a part of the
Bloomington-based school—was contradictory to the IFC’s December decision
supporting a merger of the IU School of Journalism at
In
response to a follow-up question from Anne Belcher, the Chancellor explained
that the implications for SPEA and Nursing would be as follows: SPEA would no longer be a system school but
would be a core school [between IUB and IUPUI] with other campuses having the
option of inviting SPEA to join them.
The Nursing “corridor” (between IUB, IUPUI, and IUPUC) “would be
together.”
Rosalie
Vermette asked if the President will continue to pursue initiatives like the
one detailed above or will the President-Elect take a primary role? Chancellor Bantz replied that, while the
President-Elect will play a role in decision-making as we move towards a transition,
President Herbert remains the primary leader of the university.
Ed
Berbari asked that, as tuition increases are discussed, we remain mindful of
the rapid growth of fees and there potential impact on those who are
grant-funded versus those for whom the fees might generate revenue. In short, are fees growing without bounds and
is someone advocating for students and others who might be burdened by
them? Chancellor Bantz encouraged
Berbari to keep articulating that concern, but explained that there appears to
be no easy solution to surrounding fee and tuition issues. The Chancellor also reported that
Undergraduate Student President Nathan Kohley gave “a terrific presentation on
student fees to Board of Trustees” advocating for a substantial increase in
student fees in order to improve student life and services. In his appearance
before the Board, Kohley argued that students need to be and, in many cases,
are prepared to pay for an investment in improved student life.
Enid Zwirn asked what the
Chancellor plans to do to help advance the IUPUI faculty's agenda for IU under
the new university administration? Bantz
explained that there is lot to consider in that vein, but, he gave two
examples:
(1) He plans to continue to advocate the Life Sciences
Initiative as one of the many ways in which IUPUI will have a unique and
critical impact on IU
(2) He believes that IUPUI must continue to move forward
in serving more effectively Central Indiana and
(3) He believes that retention and graduation remain top
areas of concern and that we must pursue serious analysis of the impact of the
availability of financial aid (or the lack thereof). Furthermore, we must promote campus
employment for undergraduate and graduate students, as student employment can
be a key predictor to success and retention.
In
closing, Chancellor Bantz asked that the IFC be aware that President-Elect
McRobbie is “very focused on gathering information, making decisions
accordingly, and then moving forward swiftly.”
He believes the President-Elect’s style will be well-suited for IUPUI.
Marion Wagner asked if
IUPUI has any input in the ongoing discussion at the Indiana Commission of
Higher Education on the revision of the Commission's Framework for Higher Education for Indiana. The Chancellor responded that “the
short-answer is ‘yes.’” In his role as the Chancellor of IUPUI, Bantz is
committee to continuing this important expression of our viewpoint to the
Commission. As Indiana University
Executive Vice President, he is obligated to maintain a relationship with the
Commission. The Chancellor closed by
urging faculty to share their feedback on the Framework.
Jim
Baldwin asked the Chancellor to clarify who negotiates with the Commission on
IUPUI’s behalf, the IU administration or IUPUI administration. Chancellor Bantz replied “yes and yes,”
noting that he is the is liaison for all academic matters, J.T. Forbes is the
liaison for political matters, and Bob Sandy works on course articulation
issues. David Malik, Sandy, and Bantz
are currently working on this issue.
Subah
Packer asked that the administration remain mindful of the concern that tuition
hikes might negatively affect retention and graduation. She followed up by asking if tuition hikes
might inadvertently result in students’ financial ability superseding their
academic aptitude in the admissions process.
Bantz appreciate Packer’s points and further noted that IUPUI is
challenged by the very modest amount of need-based financial aid available to it.
Martin Spechler expressed
concerns about policies on credit transfers from two-year institutions to the
School of Continuing Studies (the issue—which centers on agreements made by
previous deans—was discovered, reported, and being reviewed by Dean Daniel
Callison). The question is whether IU
degrees are being granted by the school without the guidance of appropriate
standards. Spechler asked that the UFC
“Educational Policies Committee examine how the School of Continuing Studies on
the IUPUI campus is offering degrees with very minimum residency
requirements.” IFC President Ng noted
that the issue highlighted by this situation is the fact that approving degree
requirements has never been the purview of the IFC; Ng believes the Council
should discuss this issue and its impact on faculty awareness. Chancellor Bantz noted the need for a clear
policy on the maximum number of credit hours transferable from two-year
institutions.
Agenda Item VII: [ACTION ITEM] From
the Constitution & Bylaws Committee - Update of Budgetary Affairs
Committee Charge: Henry Karlson (Chair – Constitution & Bylaws Committee,
4.2298, hkarlson@iupui.edu).
Karlson reviewed the
proposed revision of the charge
of the IFC Budgetary Affairs Committee (Circular
IFC-2007-03):
“Background
Section B of Bylaw Article III, of the
Constitution of the IUPUI faculty provides for 16 standing committees of the
Faculty which include the Budgetary Affairs Committee (BAC). The proposed
amendment is intended to clarify the charges for the IUPUI BAC and also to
better align them with those of its counterpart Budgetary Affairs Committee on
the Bloomington Campus.
Current Charge
per Article III-B.3
[Budgetary Affairs.] This committee shall
review the general academic priorities of IUPUI and the reflection of such
needs in the creation of budgets, inform the Council on budgeting procedures
and points of potential faculty input, and alert the Council to matters of
budgetary importance external to IUPUI.
Proposed
Amendment to Article III-B.3
[Budgetary Affairs.] This committee shall
act as a representative of the Council in offering to the IUPUI Chancellor and
the Campus Administration its continuing advice and the Faculty perspectives on
all aspects of the IUPUI budgetary policy and the allocation of the IUPUI
financial resources, especially those proposed allocations and re-allocations
of financial resources that have bearing on the economic well-being of the
faculty and the academic programs. Among others, the committee's
responsibilities shall include:
A.
Assessing the fiscal health of all academic and administrative support units,
through its participation in the Campus Planning and Budgetary Hearings, and by
other means including direct communication with faculty budgetary committees at
the school or unit level.
B.
Considering and reviewing the general academic priorities of IUPUI and the
reflection of such needs in capital outlays and in the creation of budgets.
C.
Considering the relative allocations of the Campus financial resources with
respect to new programs and the implications to existing programs.
D.
Alerting the Council to all matters of budgetary importance internal or
external to IUPUI.
E. Facilitating coordination and communication
among school level budgetary affairs or equivalent committees.”
Vermette called the
question and the amendment—which required the approval of 2/3 of voting IFC
members present—passed unanimously. It
will become effective immediately.
Agenda Item VIII: [FIRST READING] IFC-2007-04: Request for Endorsement
of IUPUI Student Affairs Committee Recommendations Regarding Campus Student
Pedestrian Safety: Marsha Ellett (Chair – Student Affairs Committee, 4.0051, mlellett@iupui.edu).
Ellett gave the first reading of a statement for which she is seeking IFC
endorsement (Circular IFC-2007-04):
“The
Student Affairs Committee recognizes the legal and manpower limitations
governing the University Police and Central Administration in regard to student
safety issues recognized on the IUPUI campus. The Committee appreciates that
laws regarding adjacent roadways were enacted to accommodate the efficient flow
of vehicular traffic and, as such, student pedestrians must assume a great deal
of responsibility for their own safety when crossing all campus roadways.
Accepting
the above factors, the City of
Based
on a response from University Police Deputy Chief of Police Larry Propst to our
inquiry regarding student pedestrian safety, the IUPUI Student Affairs
Committee makes the following recommendation to the IUPUI Faculty Senate.
Encourage
Chancellor Bantz and University Police to work with the city and the
appropriate city departments to:
1. Lower the 35
MPH speed limit on
2. Install
scramble lights at key intersections
3. Repaint
existing appropriate pedestrian crosswalks and remove those that are not
appropriate or are in violation of state statutes
4. Change the
timing of automatic signals to allow longer pedestrian crossing times”
Ellett explained that her
committee has partnered with student government to explore possible approaches
to addressing the campus increase in pedestrian-related accidents along
IFC Representatives made the
following comments and inquiries:
Betty
Jones asked if the word “manpower” could be replaced with a more neutral term,
such as “staffing.”
Enid Zwirn thanked the SAC for their good work.
Terry
Baumer stated his support for the resolution and noted that he has served on
the Campus Safety Committee for many years, shared his recollections. The speed limit on city streets on campus was
25 MPH at one point, but Baumer seems to recall a state statute or city
ordinance being invoked to raise the speed limit to 35 MPH so that the city—not
the campus—would receive any revenue from traffic violations along those
streets.
Henry
Karlson stepped down from his role as Acting Parliamentarian to ask if signage
reading “Yield to Pedestrians” could be posted at appropriate
intersections. Baumer interjected that
that suggestion has been made in the past and that he remembers being told that
posting such signage was contrary state law.
Marion
Wagner asked if the timing of traffic lights during peak commuting hours could
be addressed with the city, as well.
Kathleen
Hanna suggested the installation of pedestrian signals that are automatic and,
therefore, do not require pedestrians to press a button (there are access
issues for those confined to wheelchairs, not to mention the fact that many
students are unaware that the signals are not already automatic).
Chancellor
Bantz noted that he appreciates the SAC’s work and that pedestrian safety is a
concern we all share. He, then, asked
Terry Baumer if the Campus Safety Committee has ever discussed narrowing or
curving
With discussion concluded,
Vice President Vermette announced that the IFC will act on this request for
endorsement at the April 3rd IFC meeting.
Agenda Item IX: [FIRST
Jones gave a first reading of the proposed Critical Thinking principle (Circular IFC-2007-05) which is to be
integrated as #2 of 6 in the IUPUI
Principles of Undergraduate Learning.
Jones reminded the IFC that Principles 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6 were
revised—from the original 1998 document—and approved in January 2006. The Critical Thinking principle was sent back
to the AAC for further revision following extensive discussion at the December
2005 IFC meeting. This proposal is the
result:
“Definition:
Critical
thinking is the ability of students to engage in a process of disciplined
thinking that informs beliefs and actions. A student who demonstrates critical
thinking applies the process of disciplined thinking by remaining open-minded,
reconsidering previous beliefs and actions, and adjusting his or her thinking,
beliefs and actions based on new information.
Outcomes:
The
process of critical thinking begins with the ability of students to remember
and understand, but it is truly realized when the student demonstrates the
ability to
·
apply,
·
analyze,
·
evaluate, and
·
create
knowledge, procedures, processes, or products to discern bias,
challenge assumptions, identify consequences, arrive at reasoned conclusions,
generate and explore new questions, solve challenging and complex problems, and
make informed decisions.”
Jones opened the discussion
by thanking Ingrid Ritchie for her work on this revision. The IFC then offered the following feedback:
Ed
Berbari expressed concern that the use of the word “beliefs” may imply
religious meaning or have too much “cultural overlay”—may even be confusing to
prospective students and their parents—and that, perhaps, clarification is
needed. His concerns were echoed by
Henry Karlson, Subah Packer, and Richard Meiss.
Among the suggestions for substitutions:
“thinking and ideas,” “assumptions,” “informed,” and “knowledge.” Jim Baldwin, Richard Ward, and Andre De
Tienne were of the opinion that “belief” was an appropriate word in this
context, noting that in this case “belief” refers to the fact that students
accept certain ideas and act based on their understanding and background. Ward noted that he often asks students to
reconsider their beliefs and cultures, although he doesn’t want to deny
them. Vermette asked the IFC to vote on
whether or not the word “belief” should remain in the definition. A majority of the IFC voted in favor of
keeping the word “belief.”
Richard
Meiss noted that the steps contained in the principle lack context.
Andre
De Tienne noted that this version of the principle is a vast improvement over
the original.
Vermette closed discussion by
announcing that the IFC will act on this proposed principle at the April 3rd
IFC meeting.
Agenda Item X: [SECOND
Jones, then, re-read the
language proposed as an addendum (Circular IFC-2007-06) to the Principles of Undergraduate Learning addressing the implementation,
assessment, and revision process. This language,
she explained, was originally proposed [in 2005] as a preamble, but became a
postscript at the suggestion of the 2005-06 IFC. Jones noted that the original PULs (1998)
stated nothing about “ownership” and the revision processes, motivating her committee
to clearly and publicly address the issue.
Original Language (from the 1998 PULs): The AAC
recommends that the IUPUI Faculty Council adopt the following descriptions of
the Principles of Undergraduate Learning. These descriptions include brief definitions
and the general ways in which the principles can be demonstrated.
The Principles of
Undergraduate Learning are the essential ingredients of the undergraduate
educational experience at Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis.
These principles form a conceptual framework for all students' general
education but necessarily permeate the curriculum in the major field of study
as well. More specific expectations for IUPUI's graduates are determined by the
faculty in a student's major field of study. Together, these expectations speak
to what graduates of IUPUI will know and what they will be able to do upon
completion of their degree.
Proposed
New Language:
Introduction. The Principles of Undergraduate Learning are
the essential ingredients of the undergraduate educational experience at
Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis. These principles form a
conceptual framework for all students' general education but necessarily
permeate the curriculum in the major field of study as well. These principles describe the fundamental
intellectual competence and cultural and ethical awareness that we believe
every graduate of an IUPUI baccalaureate degree program should attain.
Implementation. Faculty who teach undergraduates will include
the principles on syllabi, determine which of the principles will be taught and
assessed in each of their courses, and so advise students. Faculty
in a student's major field of study will determine the expectations for
graduates related to the principles, establish plans for and systematically
assess and adjust curricula to insure graduates meet the principles, and will
advise students regarding the principles and their centrality to the
expectations of every IUPUI graduate.
Together, these expectations speak to what graduates of IUPUI will know
and what they will be able to do upon completion of their degrees.
Assessment. Faculty in each school will annually plan
for, implement and assess progress toward meeting the principles in
undergraduate courses and curricula.
Schools will provide the Academic Affairs Committee (representing
Faculty Council), Dean of Faculties and OPII with annual planning and
implementation plans early in the academic year, and with assessment reports at
the end of the academic year. OPII will
determine the format for the assessment reports, coordinate gathering of annual
School assessment reports, and prepare a campus assessment report based on the
reports provided by the Schools. OPII
will distribute a summary of its campus report and recommendations to Faculty
Council, the Dean of the Faculties, and Deans and faculties of each School by
August 1.
Revisions. Recommendations for revisions to the
principles will be directed to the Academic Affairs Committee (representing
Faculty Council). The AAC will work with
the Dean of Faculties and OPII to coordinate a campus-wide review of proposed
revisions. It will be the responsibility
of the AAC to propose revisions to Executive Committee for consideration by
Faculty Council.
In response to a question
from the floor, Jones and Banta explained the “OPII” stands for the Office of
Planning & Institutional Improvement.
Subah Packer asked how we can
assess the impact on student beliefs.
Banta suggested that we are assessing Outcomes as opposed to the Definition
(the sole passage in which the word “belief” appears).
As this proposal has not been
reviewed since January 2006, the IFC will act on this proposed language at the
April 3rd IFC meeting.
Agenda Item XI: Call for any FC or UFC Standing Committee reports:
Rosalie Vermette.
No discussion.
Agenda Item XI: Unfinished
Business: Rosalie Vermette.
When Vice
President Vermette called for unfinished business, Giles Hoyt proposed a revised resolution regarding the
Integrated Image Initiative. Discussion
of Hoyt and Marianne Wokeck’s original resolution was closed due to the loss of
quorum at the extended February 20th IFC meeting. Hoyt moved the following (which was seconded
by Marianne Wokeck):
“Be
it so moved that schools operating only on the IUPUI campus adopt, within the
general guidelines of IU’s Integrated Image Initiative, a logical and
prominently displayed IUPUI signature logo reflective of their common mission.”
Hoyt explained that IUPUI has
worked for many years to market this campus and its individual and unique
strengths…he feels that certain aspects of the Trustee-approved Integrated
Image program undermine this progress.
Chancellor Bantz remarked
that the Trustee-approved Integrated Image program was a hard-wrought compromise
and one with which a number of deans are still uncomfortable. However, previous proposals—including ones
that might have featured a higher profile for IUPUI—were rejected by the Board. While the Trustee-approved program is not an
ideal solution, it is one that has inspired progress and has, actually,
resulted in more stationery featuring the IUPUI mark.
Martin Spechler made this
observation: as mixed as our feelings
about the Trustee-approved program may be, the Board has made their decision, which
is their right. Our representatives to
the Board made [IUPUI’s] views known and “we lost.” Spechler cited the protest as unrealistic.
IFC President Ng
responded: “If the faculty cannot
express its will and preference” then faculty governance is irrelevant. It is critical, Ng said, that the IFC voice
its opinion that this program does not achieve the objective of presenting a
unified message to students. He, then,
explained that, if approved, this resolution would, first, be directed to
Interim Vice Chancellor for External Affairs Amy Conrad Warner (as opposed to
being forwarded, directly, to the Trustees).
Vice President Vermette called the
question and the motion carried, with some objection. The resolution was thereby approved.
Agenda Item XII: New
Business: Rosalie Vermette.
No discussion.
Agenda Item XIII: Adjournment:
Rosalie Vermette.
Vice President Vermette adjourned
the meeting at 5:00.
Minutes prepared by Faculty Council Coordinator, Molly
Martin
UN 403 / 274-2215 / Fax: 274-2970 / fcouncil@iupui.edu / http://www.iupui.edu/~fcouncil
[Attachment for IFC 3-6-07nutes]
ATTACHMENTS
NOT CONTAINED IN ELECTRONIC MINUTES
|
Wynne
Courtroom (Inlow Hall Room 100) /
Tuesday March 6, 2007 - 3:00-5:00 pm A G E N
D A (IFC: March 6, 2007) |
|||
|
I. |
(*) |
Welcome and Call to Order. |
Rosalie
Vermette (IUPUI Faculty
Vice-President, 4.0064, rvermett@iupui.edu).
|
|
II. |
(*) |
Adoption of the Agenda as
the Order of Business for the Day. |
Rosalie Vermette |
|
III. |
(*) |
[ACTION ITEM]
Approval of IFC 2/6/07 Minutes (distributed
electronically). |
Rosalie Vermette |
|
IV. |
(15 minutes) |
Updates/Remarks from the Chancellor. |
Charles
Bantz (
|
|
V. |
(15 minutes) |
Updates/Remarks
from the IFC President. |
Bart Ng (IUPUI Faculty President & UFC Co-Secretary, 4.8185, bng@math.iupui.edu). |
|
VI. |
(10 minutes) |
Question / Answer Period. |
Rosalie Vermette |
|
VII. |
(2 minutes) |
[ACTION ITEM] IFC-2007-03: Bylaws
Amendment: Update of Budgetary
Affairs Committee Charge (see reverse
side of agenda). |
Henry Karlson (Chair
– Constitution & Bylaws Committee, 4.2298, hkarlson@iupui.edu) |
|
VIII. |
(10 minutes) |
[FIRST |
Marsha Ellett (Chair
– Student Affairs Committee, 4.0051, mlellett@iupui.edu)
|
|
IX. |
(15 minutes) |
[FIRST |
Betty Jones
(Chair – Academic Affairs Committee, 4.2248, betjones@iupui.edu). |
|
X. |
(15 minutes) |
[SECOND |
Betty Jones |
|
XI. |
(*) |
Call for any FC or UFC
Standing Committee reports. |
Rosalie Vermette |
|
XII. |
(*) |
Unfinished Business? |
Rosalie Vermette |
|
XIII. |
(5 minutes) |
New Business? |
Rosalie Vermette |
|
XIV. |
(*) |
Adjournment. |
Rosalie Vermette |
|
Next
Faculty Council Meeting: Tuesday
April 3, 2007, 3:00-5:00pm, Wynne Courtroom of Inlow Hall (IH 100) Please visit the Faculty Council website at http://www.iupui.edu/~fcouncil for agenda, updates & more. Agenda prepared by Faculty Council
Coordinator Molly Martin: UN 403 / 274-2215 / Fax: 274-2970 / fcouncil@iupui.edu / http://www.iupui.edu/~fcouncil |
|||