Saturday, October 31, 2009
My Roundtable Initiative Meeting Report (for 10/28)
http://www.epsilen.com/grp/092926
At the September 30 meeting the newly-appointed six A&S Council representatives met for the first time with other UT professors and administrators who had been selected during the Extended Roundtable Retreat held May 2, 2009 “to assure the input of the Roundtable Steering Committee.” These other members included two or more persons from each of five Facilitator Groups tasked to report on five priority issues (“challenges” /“action items”): Scholarship, Teaching Modalities, Graduate Studies, Curriculum, and Space. Each Facilitator Group at the Retreated created its own preliminary report. These reports were forwarded to the participants of the September 30 meeting, for the purposes of further discussion.
At the end of the September 30 meeting five new sub-groups of the Roundtable formed to write five revised draft reports on the same five priority issues. Each report was this time to include a list of “implementable things.” Everyone agreed to reconvene as a single large group again on October 28 to discuss the contents of these reports, and to arrive at an implementation timetable. Members volunteering for these sub-groups were:
Teaching Modalities: Pryor, Nemeth, Rizk, Poplin Gossetti, Habrecht
Space: Anderson Huang, Denham, Tucker
Curriculum: Heberle, Barlow, Stierman, Brady
Graduate Studies: Beatty, Medina, Benjamin, Chandar
Scholarship: Gilbert, Rouillard, Nemeth, Burnett
I will briefly describe and comment here on selected aspects the October 28 meeting.
The October 28 meeting: At the October 28 meeting the five reports were distributed and their issues discussed. Roundtable Initiative (RI) participants in attendance included (in order of seating, clockwise, around the boardroom table): Nina McClelland, Ben Pryor, Lawrence Anderson Huang, David Nemeth, Jamie Barlow, Penny Poplin Gosetti, Linda Rouillard, Rupali Chandar, James Benjamin, David Tucker, Peter Lindquist, Mark Denham, Christine Habrecht, and Renee Heberle. Also, Provost Haggett was present for part of the meeting.
Dean McClelland designated Pryor and Heberle to marshal and record the discussions. The Dean’s preliminary comments stressed the importance of developing at this meeting an implementation plan and its timetable. She mentioned in this regard the importance of producing “down-the-line” strong evidence of “value returned” on the university’s significant “investment” in the Roundtable process, which she estimated at “midway” toward its goal(s). She emphasized that one of these goals would be a “hiring plan” and incentives for retention of faculty. Another goal was for the A&S College to attain a “tier one” national ranking. She reminded the committee how the five priority issues are intertwined: the final RI proposed implementation plan would “drive the train” to our first-tier ranking.
Then commenced the discussions in turn of the five revised reports, moving through their issues in this order: scholarship, graduate studies, space, curriculum, teaching modalities. Pryor’s meeting notes will soon be posted on the Epsilen Roundtable blog, to provide our faculty with details from these discussions.
There appeared to be wide agreement among faculty Roundtable participants that many related teaching modalities/scholarship/curriculum issues involving increasing faculty incentives and rewards for their successful investments of time and energy in innovative teaching and service could be integrated into existing annual ARPA, Merit and Workload processes. There was general recognition and agreement that UT should become a 24/7/365 operation if it is ever to reach its potential as a highly ranked state public higher education institution. Everyone also seemed to agree with regard to campus facilities that “space is important!” The terms “motivation,” “morale,” and “incentives” came up frequently with reference to performance of students and faculty. Everyone seemed to agree on the need for increased stipends and support for graduate students. Also, sabbaticals in support of faculty teaching initiatives had wide support.
There were disagreements, of course. Participants debated the strengths and weaknesses of “active” and “passive” modes of learning; whether or not a “first tier” ranking for the A&S College is achievable in the context of a continued open admissions policy; the purpose of and need for a faculty club; the benefits of eliminating the position of department “chairs” in the A&S College administrative hierarchy (in favor of departmental “heads”). Also, the question of the impact of President Jacobs’ rethinking ‘Directions’ [the University’s strategic plan] on the A&S College Roundtable implementation recommendations remains unanswered.
Where To Now? These productive discussions continued till near noon. The Roundtable meeting quickly wound down with an agreed-upon extension of a timetable into the future. Participants agreed to allow a representative from each task group to further revise each report, and to combine the five reports, perhaps with the appointment of an editor, into one draft complete report. This single document will be distributed to A&S Council members for their comments in late November. These comments will be appended to the document when the full Roundtable Implementation group reconvenes end of November. Discussion at that meeting will result in a revised single report. This revised report will then be posted on the A&S College Roundtable Epsilen webpage for general public review. Thanks to all who Emailed me to comment on my first RI report. Please continue to contact me personally with your comments and concerns, or post them on this blog as "Comments" if you wish to engage in a broader conversation about my report. You may also want to contact any of the named participants above to discover their perspectives on the meeting.
David Nemeth, Professor of Geography and Planning, A&S Council Appointee to the A&S Roundtable Initiative implementation group.
Higher Morality Does Exist in Administration

(Continued....)
"Clearly the university has a lot of mojo right now," trustee Brian K. Hicks said.
"Thank you for leading our mojo, Dr. Gee."
The board gave Mr. Gee high marks for recruiting an outstanding leadership team;
involving students, professors, staff members, and the board in all levels of
decision-making, and partnering with businesses and community groups to
address issues greater than just the university.
Trustees also praised him for pushing a $1 billion expansion of the OSU Medical
Center.
Based on his performance this year, the board decided to give Mr. Gee a $20,053
raise. The increase, equal to 2.5 percent of his current base salary of $802,125,
mirrors the aggregate percentage given to OSU's faculty and staff.
The money will be diverted to the university's "Students First, Students Now"
scholarship fund.
Another $950,000 in raises and bonuses that would have gone to Mr. Gee's senior
management team will go into that fund.
Trustees also decided that Mr. Gee had earned a 35 percent bonus for meeting
goals.
But his bonus, like those of other top officials, was reduced by 10 percentage points
because of the lousy economy.
Mr. Gee will receive the $200,531 bonus, but he will donate it to a scholarship fund
that he established this year with a $1 million personal pledge.
Mr. Gee will pay the taxes on that income out of his other earnings.
Mr. Gee said the university's success is a reflection of the people under him.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Dean Resolution Passed at A&S Council's Recent Meeting
A few notes on the above resolution:

