Summary of October 1998 Meeting Feedback Results (Previous meeting results follow below)

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Comments NextMtg Date Created
3 2 3 2 The questions don't really cover my objections: I think discussion should be more strongly controlled, with comments quickly ruled out of order if they don't address the motion. I propose that only amendments presented in advance be considered. Each should be alloted a time (10 minutes) for discussion, at the end of which the question is automatically called. There can then be 15 minutes general discussion before the main motion is voted on. That way we can accomplish something without letting the same people use the opportunity of a forum to trot out the same arguments we've all heard many times before. Let's use the above method to quickly decide the student survey issue. I'd like at some meeting (perhaps not November) a (short) discussion on what can be done to get more women and minorities to Babson. I'm troubled by the poor numbers. Another issue for the future: ways to combat grade inflation. 10/26/98
5 3 2 1 Faculty meeting seem to be an opportunity for the senior tenured faculty to remind everyone how long they have been around. It is a joke to think faculty meetings represent the views of junior faculty. I have been encouraged to use more technology in my classes, but it seems our ability to manage the academic technology needs is in question. Sould we outsource the entire IT function. At least once a week I need to call ITSD to let them know a server is down. It seems we have lost control of this critical resource. 10/26/98
1 1 1 4 Ideally, the faculty meeting should provide a forum for debating basic ideas and concepts, not details. By the time a motion is presented to the faculty, it should have received a thorough review in committees and special meetings open to faculty. At this point, the different points of view should be known to all parties, so that a vote can proceed without the tedious debate that often bogs down a general faculty meeting. 11/11/98

Summary of February 1998 Meeting Results (March Results follow below)
The Questionare
The Numbers

Related: FreePress IMC Discussion
Q1  Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Comments NextMtg Date Created
5 5 5 3 5 It was all fluff and window dressing. There are very substantial issues that need to be discussed, but we got a public relationsjob. I have better things to do with my time than listening to faculty telling us what a great time they are having, when we know that most of the faculty are hurting.

Get a grip on the faculty agenda. Let's discuss matters of substance. The real issue is can we afford more and more integrated curriculum. That is what we ought to be discussing.

We should discuss why faculty members are feeling so stressed. Here are some topics:

(1) The bookstore continues to be a problem. Fall book and case orders due on April 15... The organization of course packages was not much better this semester than last. There were again lots of problems.

(2) The computer system is still way below par. Frequent crashes, especially on Globenet Remote.

(3) The integrated curriculum is proving to be frustrating and exhausting, but we are not facing up to the problems.

(4) Why didn't Babson's full-time MBA program make it into the top-50 in U.S.News and World Report recent survey? What do we need to do to improve our standing. We seem to have our priorities mixed up: Our part-time MBA program is again on the top-10 list, but we are planning major changes to it. Is that logical? (In the words of that great banker-philosopher Bert Lance: If it ain't broke don't fix it.) On the other hand, the full-time MBA program is languishing with the also-rans. Shouldn't we be putting our efforts into that program--especially, the second-year electives?

4 2 2 2 5     2/25/98
            Is the faculty parking situation important enough to raise at a faculty meeting? The new construction is taking away faculty parking, but not changing student parking, meaning that we have to park further away than many students. Are we as a faculty OK with this? It seems very costly to Babson. 2/25/98
3 3 3 2 3     2/25/98
5 1 5 4 1 I thought the questions to be discussed were provocative and worth considering for debate.....
unfortunately we did not get to discuss them at all. I was very disappointed. 
2 1 5 1 1 The structure and time line was good, except it was not followed. The presenters were trying to sell the program and not answer the issues raised by the agenda committee.Out of the sets presenting only one actually addressed the issues. The last one was the worst, Fred and Nan sstarted by saying they were only marginally involved with IMC. I go to faculty meeting to hear and participate in discussion, not to just listen to presentations. We need to discuss the role of the academic administration. We are replacing Allan but giving no thought to the way decisions are made and resources allocated. The chairs go to meetings and mentor, but are not managed at all, and have no resources. The Deans are leaders with limited resources, it seems that the office of academic affairs make all the resource allocations with no input on workload.

What happened to quideprof?

What is being done on workload?

What happened to all the reengineering efforts?

Is anyone studing faculty efficiency, how we use technology, share knowledge, share experiences?

4 5 3 5 5 The presentations were informative; however, there was little opportunity for an actual discussion of the various issues raised. Therefore, this became a "one-way report," which is second-best to a true exchange among the faculty. (I realize time may have been a factor here, but to the extent we can tip the balance on this next time, it would be helpful.) At some point this semester, I believe the faculty should have a discussion concerning the academic integrity issues plaguing our campus. Many faculty, especially newer members of the team, are not familiar with the school's policies and procedures with regard to these situations. Beyond that, the philosophy of the faculty with regard to prevention, enforcement, and discipline needs examination. Where should the balance between these be? Are we practicing appropriate preventive techniques? Are we making it clear to students that this is an important priority to us? Are we filing cases with the judicial bodies when circumstances dictate that we should? Are we satisfied with the severity of the sanctions for various infractions? What are we doing, or can we do, to alter the student culture so that academic integrity becomes a core value among the student body? 2/26/98
5 1 5 2 1 we wuz stonewalled! One of the reasons that I do not attend too many faculty meetings was made clear by the last one. They are a prodigious waste of time. The agenda (in spite of the agenda committee) is set and there will be NO wavering from it. As a matter of fact, didn't I hear Chris Hennessey (or someone) announce that the "discussion" was not meant to criticize the new Curriculum? And so we were treated to people patting themselves on the back and avoiding focusing on issues. Do what was promised fir February. 2/27/98
3 3 3 5 5 Re: Question 4 above. Unfortunately, I don't think we had much of a "panel discussion," and hence my weak-to-neutral scoring of the preceding questions. I personally don't believe "presentations" are akin to "discussion." Having said that, perhaps faculty meetings are not the right forum for "discussions." Hope that helps.   3/2/98
4 1 5 2 1 The panel presenters went on too long, repeating information largely known by the Faculty. We, as a Faculty, have our own concerns and ideas about the curriculum. We need greater opportunity to voice our ideas. Academic Vice President Dearch

Current degeneration of the moral climate at Babson.

1 5 3 2 3/5/98
4 3 2 4  2  It seems the time the faculty has when we are all together is really at a premium. And at each faculty meeting I have gone to, so far anyway, someone has said something about not really having time for everyone to talk or a full discussion on an issue. So, to me anyway, it seems faculty meetings should be used primarily to allow the faculty to interact, not to be passive. Just an idea, thought.   3/6/98

Summary of March 1998 Meeting Results

Q1 Q2 Q3 Comments (Incl AVP Discussion) Topics for April Meeting
5 1 2 Although the faculty discussion of the Academic VP role was substantive, not enough time was allocated to it. Also, the presence of the panel inf
1 2 5 thank you for asking these questions! but I thought it was quite a useful meeting (March) hope you are having / have had a good break ! revisions to IMC, re. the "content" and re. the "process"
2 4 2 I just have the feeling that what we are going through is a "pseudo-process" and ultimately the administration will do whatever they please, regardless of faculty desires. The paucity of the annual increases this year.
5 4 2 We have not really had a discussion of this position. Id the 2 Deans will in fact report to Lee then, the VPAA, becomes an admin person to help with workload, tenure, salary review. Eventually the Deans will have the budget and the Dean of faculty will have a job with many flash points, but very little power or authority.
What is Lee's view on the faculty salary issue? Are we lower or higher than Darden? Does Lee think it is appropriate that we are 10-17% below the schools we compete for faculty? Does Lee think it is a problem that junior faculty are 4% below copeting schools? Does Lee think a policy where Babson would close the gap with elite schools over time. What progress has the Dean's and chairs made since our retreat last year? It seemed that workload was a big issue, is anything happening?