The Executive Board


Meeting of October 24, 2000

Held in the Poole Board Room of the Wardlaw Building


Members Present: Abdel-Khalik (ME); Allen (Arch); Callen (ECE); Jayaraman (Mgt); Ledon (Staff Rep); Liotta (Vice Provost); McGuire (LCC); Richards (GTRI); Swank (GTRI); Welch (GTRI): Williamson (Liby); Clough (Pres.); Spriggle (UG Stu Rep)

Members Absent: Boyd (Stu Servcs); El-Sayed (Chem); Estes (EDI); Hall (Bio); Jenman (GS rep); Schwan (CoC); Wardi (ECE); M.Thomas (Provost); E.Thomas (SoF)

Visitors: Hilenski (IAC); Moore (Provost); (Hardwick (Phys)


  1. Said Abdel Khalik, Chair, opened the meeting at 3:12 p.m.
  2. The minutes of the meeting of September 26, 2000 were approved without dissent.
  3. Carole Moore, Chair of the Welfare & Security Committee presented an overview of the Committee’s operations. She stated that their charge is extremely broad and encompasses: Campus Planning, Security and Safety in very broad terms, Parking (now under Auxiliary Services), and Auxiliary Services of which the Student Health Center (formerly the Infirmary) is now part. She stated that Auxiliary Services, Student Health Center and Parking have their own advisory boards, while Campus/Master Planning, Campus Safety-SCAT have their own committee or department (Environmental Science, Health & Safety).

Over the past year, the Welfare & Security committee has looked at parking, on-site child care, family leave policy and campus security. Attempts have been made to pursue campus planning including way-finding, but with no success. The committee is at a crossroads and is looking for direction from the Executive Board. Some of the issues raised by the Committee are: a) Is there an overlap with the Benefits Committee? b) Should the Student Health Center be removed as a specific charge? c) Should Welfare & Security Committee members be included (ex-officio) on all relevant committees as standard procedure? d) Should members be privy to documents and proposals before they become policy? e) Should the Committee cease trying to be proactive and become more reactive in terms of specific concerns from the faculty? Assume more of an "ombudsman" role? f) Given that most of the areas included in the Committee's charge are under Business and Finance, are these viable areas for a faculty committee to oversea? Is it an antiquated concept? g) Should the Committee submit an annual document that reviews policies/actions in the related areas?

Abdel-Khalik noted the Committee is a standing committee of the General faculty; as such it should be the eyes and ears of the faculty and should report to faculty to keep them informed on issues relating to their welfare and security. Moore stated that the committee needs to be more involved in decision making instead of after-the-fact information session. President Clough suggested that individual representatives from units/boards be invited to give updates to the committee. Abdel-Khalik asked if a member of the committee should serve as ex-officio on oversight committees for units/activities which fall under the Committee’s purview. A general discussion of the Board regarding the committee's role in the decision making process ensued with a suggestion that the Welfare & Security Committee work with the Statutes Committee to see how the Statutes defining the charter of the committee can be made more current and specific. It was also agreed that Carol Moore will provide to the Secretary of the Faculty a list of campus committees on which a member of the Welfare and Security Committee needs to serve as ex-officio.

  1. The President provided a follow-up on the State of the Institute Address by welcoming comments on his address. Comments received to date include concerns that $250K may not be enough to promote undergraduate participation in research. One-page proposals will be solicited as soon as possible in an attempt to get this initiative up and running by Thanksgiving. Would like to have more requests than funding; would be disappointed if opposite occurs. CETL has been given money to work with students in specific units.

The President indicated that we are beginning to get positive feedback from the Governor's Office regarding salary increases. Health insurance costs continue to be a big issue. Richards asked about the effective date for pay increases; the President said he thought the increase would probably not go back to July 1.

  1. Abdel-Khalik presented the list of nominees for the five slots to be filled on the Institute Post-Tenure Review Committee (two from CoE, and one each from CoC, CoS, and IAC). Abdel-Khalik indicated that in accordance with Bob McMath’s recommendation, members will generally serve for two years and that half of the members will be replaced every year to provide continuity. The nominations were made by Executive Board members from the respective Colleges with the names listed in order of preference. At least two nominees were offered for each open slot. The Board agreed without dissent to name the top-listed nominee(s) from each group to the Institute’s Post-Tenure Review committee. The Secretary of the Faculty will confirm the nominees’ willingness and eligibility to serve; if not, the next nominee(s) on the list will be asked to serve.
  2. A list of nominees for the Staff representative position on the Executive Board was presented by Abdel-Khalik. The list included five nominations made by Board members. It was noted that the new member will serve through September 2002; normally the Staff representative is appointed on an annual basis. The Board agreed without dissent to ask Pearl Alexander (OHR) to fill that position through September 2002. The secretary of the Faculty will confirm her willingness to serve; if not the next person on the list of nominees will be asked. The Board thanked Pat Ledon for her service and wished her well in her new career activities.
  3. Abdel-Khalik reviewed the agenda for the December 5, 2000 Academic Senate Meeting. He noted it will be a very full agenda, but will depend on how the report by the Ad Hoc Committee on Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure will be presented. He suggested that the distributed AS meeting agenda should include a web site for the entire RPT committee report. Also, a separate document for proposed changes in the faculty handbook should be made and distributed to the AS for discussion and recommendation. The "best practices" part of the report should be placed in a separate document and distributed to all academic faculty for their consideration and possible adoption. It may be necessary to ask the Ad Hoc Committee Chairs (McGinnis and LeBlanc) to present the report in a preliminary fashion at the December 5 Academic Senate Meeting with full discussion at the February 6, 2001 meeting of the GFA/AS. The proposed agenda for the Academic Senate December 5 meeting was approved without dissent.
  4. Welch reported on plans for the Executive Board retreat. She indicated that all responses were in favor of holding the Retreat. Suggestions for discussion: a) Student issues (retention), b) Committees reorganization, responsibilities and workload issues, and c) Intellectual Property policy, issues, and conflict of interest. Liotta reported on a recently completed study on how different universities handled intellectual property, commercialization, faculty start-ups, etc. The committee was chaired by Dr. Chameau. It included faculty, OSP Administration and Legal Affairs. A report was given to the President that was being reviewed by the Washington group (WAG). Welch said that Georgia Tech has conflicting policies in this area. A general discussion of the proposed retreat topics ensued. It was agreed that the retreat would be a good forum to discuss the intellectual property issue since a great deal of "preparation work" has already been done. It was also agreed that it may not be productive to include the committees’ reorganization issue on this retreat’s agenda, since a great deal of work may need to be done ahead of time by the Statutes Committee and the committees themselves, before the Board can discuss and act on such recommendations. The President suggested that we include a discussion of "diversity"; specifically, the "meaning" and "implications" of diversity as a possible topic for this retreat. Welsh will contact Pearl Alexander to coordinate this topic. It was agreed to hold the retreat early in the year on a date of a scheduled board meeting and that the format follows that used last year. The target date for the EB Retreat is February 13, 2001.
  5. The issue of Journal pricing was discussed. Abdel-Khalik indicated that, with the concurrence of the President, the resolution proposed by the Library Subcommittee of the Academic Services Committee was removed from the Agenda for the October 10 GF/GFA meeting. It was agreed without dissent that we should wait until the new Dean of Libraries starts so he can bring his perspective to this issue, as well as other issues. He should be invited to make presentations to the Board and to the GF/GFA at an early date.
  6. Abdel-Khalik presented the Emeritus Status Policy modified to include recommendations made by the faculty at the October 10 GF/GFA meeting. Notably, the policy spells out procedures for academic and non-academic units. After a discussion of the wording changes, Mark Richards agreed to re-write the non-academic units section of the policy to accommodate units with and without a Faculty Advisory committee. The final version of the policy will be presented at the next Board meeting. It was agreed that the changes to be made are consistent with the GF/GFA approved policy and that there is no need to resubmit the policy to the GF/GFA. The policy will be forwarded to the Provost for inclusion in the faculty handbook.
  7. There being no further business the Chair brought the meeting to a close at 4:33 p.m.


Respectfully submitted


Edward W. Thomas

Secretary of the Faculty

October 25, 2000


Attachments to the Archival Copy of the minutes:

(1) Agenda