BABSON COLLEGE

Faculty meeting

     November 14, 2001

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:  A. Ali, I. Allen, A. Anderson, N. Balaguer, A. Bayer, J. Bethel, N. Bharadwaj, G. Bhardwaj, R. Bliss, J. Bozewicz, K. Bruyneel, E. Cale, W. Casey, A. Cohen, S. Collins, W. Coyle, I. Dambolena, A. Dhebar, A. Donnellon, P. Dover, C. Ehrlich, J. Ellis, S. Eriksen, M. Fetters, F. Fleischmann, R. Frost, A. Goerzen, M. Goldstein, S. Gordon, N. Govoni, D. Greenberg, D. Grewal, T. Grossman, P. Guinan, L. O’Brien-Hallstein, R. Halsey, H. Han, K. Hauf, D. Hennessey, K. Hevert, S. Holt, J. Hoopes, J. Hunt, JP Jeannet, H. Johnston, K. Jones, JB Kassarjian, K. Kelly, R. Kimball, D. Kopcso, R. Kopp, L. Krigman, E. Landry, J. Lange, N. Langowitz, B. Lawler, T. Lester, M. Levy, J. Lindsey-Mullikin, R. Mandel, R. Markus, K. Matsuno, J. McKenzie, K. McKone, CJ McNair, J. Melnick, M. Minniti, T. Moore, I. Morgan, L. Moss, A. Nanni, H. Neck, B. Nemitz, C. Nixon, D. Paul, J. Parrino, B. Pattridge, R. Petty, J. Philips, M. Pinard, K. Platt, L. Polutnik, M. Potter, G. Prichett, S. Rangan, A. Rao, T. Reilly, J. Ricciardi, K. Rollag, C. Rufin, W. Rybolt, M. Rice, J. Saber, S. Schiffman, K. Seiders, B. Seitz, N. Sharpe, J. Shulman, E. Sirri, V. Soybel, S. Spinelli, D. Stoddard, N. Taylor, M. Tomas, M. Tropp, D. Troxell, G. Truman, S. Turner, C. Wain, J. Williams, J. Yellin, A. Zacharakis

 

The Faculty Meeting was called to order at approximately 3:35 p.m.  David Hennessey of the Faculty Agenda Committee, announced that Kathleen Kelly would again serve as Meeting Moderator and Richard Mandel would serve as Parliamentarian.

 

Professor Kelly placed a motion before the faculty to approve the minutes of the October 10, 2001 faculty meeting.  The motion was seconded.  Professor McKenzie asked that the chart presented at the Oct. 10 meeting displaying the impact on the academic divisions of proposed changes to the allowed number of non-tenure track faculty be added to the permanent minutes of the Faculty Meeting.  Hank Deneault agreed to add the above mentioned chart to the permanent record of the Faculty Meeting.  The minutes of the October 10, 2001 Faculty Meeting were then unanimously approved.

 

Associate VP Deneault conducted an election to fill a 3-year term on the Technology Advisory Board (TAB).  Assistant Professor Keith Rollag (Management Division) was then elected to a 3-year term on the TAB.

 

AVP Fetters made the following motion relating to “Policies and Procedures” for consideration by the Faculty.

 

MOTION #3:

 

            TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE PERCENTAGE OF NON-TENURE TRACK FACULTY PER ACADEMIC DIVISION TO 20 PERCENT (ROUNDED DOWN).

 

The motion was seconded.

 

Professor John Saber proposed an amendment to MOTION #3, as follows: 

 

 

 

PROPOSED AMENDMENT:

 

 

EACH ACADEMIC DIVISION IS ALLOWED A 20% (ROUNDED UP) CAP FOR ITS FULL-TIME NON-TENURE TRACK FACULTY, WITH AN OVERALL COLLEGE-WIDE CAP OF 15% (ROUNDED UP), NOT INCLUDING FACULTY JOINTLY APPOINTED WITH THE FRANKLIN W. OLIN COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING.

 

IN ADDITION, THERE IS A 10% (ROUNDED UP) CAP COLLEGE-WIDE FOR NON-TENURE TRACK FACULTY JOINTLY APPOINTED WITH THE F.W. OLIN COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND WITHIN EACH DIVISION THERE IS A 25% (ROUNDED UP) CAP ON THE TOTAL NUMBER OF NON-TENURE TRACK FACULTY.

 

 

The amendment to the motion was seconded. 

 

Kathleen Kelly asked for discussion on the amendment to MOTION #3. 

 

Professor Saber displayed the following table (using “dummy” data) to demonstrate the impact on the number of non-tenure track faculty in the event his amendment was approved by the Faculty. 

 

6 Divisions of 20 each

 

 

Present
Full Time

Non Tenure
Non-Olin

Olin

Maximum
Non Tenure

Total
Faculty

 

Division

20

4

-

5

25

 

College

120

18

12

30

150

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6 Divisions: 1 with 25, 2 with 20,  2 with 15,  1 with 10

 

 

Present
Full Time

Non Tenure
Non-Olin

Olin

Maximum
Non Tenure

Total
Faculty

 

Division

25

5

-

7

32

32

Division

20

4

-

5

25

50

Division

15

3

-

4

19

38

Division

10

2

-

3

13

13

College

105

16

11

27

132

133

Note:  All divisions cannot be at maximum since total would then be 133

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Associate VP Hank Deneault provided the following data to demonstrate the impact of the amendment on actual divisional and College-wide faculty numbers

 

 

 

 

PERM

10%

20%

20%

DIVISION

FAC

UP

DOWN

UP

 

 

 

 

 

ARTS & HUMANITIES

11

2

2

3

ACCOUNTING/LAW

19

2

3

4

ECONOMICS

13

2

2

3

ENTREPRENEURSHIP

10

1

2

2

FINANCE

17

2

3

4

HISTORY & SOCIETY

14

2

2

3

MANAGEMENT

31

4

6

7

MARKETING

18

2

3

4

MATH/SCIENCE

23

3

4

5

 

 

 

 

 

TOTAL ALL DIVISIONS

156

20

27

35

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

15% Rounded Up

 

 

 

24

 

 

 

 

 

Deneault indicated that Professor Saber’s amendment would result in raising the overall college-wide cap from 20 (under current rules) to 24 (not including joint appointments with the F.W. Olin College).  Professor Saber indicated that his amendment is designed to allow more flexibility for those divisions that rely heavily on non-tenure track personnel while maintaining a reasonable limit on a college-wide basis. 

 

Professor Ellis expressed concern over the potential of achieving disproportionate distributions of non-tenure track faculty in specific areas (e.g., strategy) within individual academic divisions. 

 

AVP Fetters expressed concern with the 25% overall cap proposed in the second paragraph of the Saber amendment.  He indicated that there is uncertainty around forecasting how the Olin joint appointments will be used.   As such, he expressed his opposition to the amendment.

 

Citing the example of Florida Gulf Coast University which has moved to a system of no tenure, Professor Ricciardi expressed concern over moving to a 25% overall cap for non-tenure track faculty.

 

Professor John Saber said he did not want to lose the spirit of the proposed changes and he agreed  to change his amendment by withdrawing paragraph two of his amendment and discuss it at a later time.  As such, the motion was made to delete the 2nd paragraph of the proposed amendment. The faculty voted unanimously in favor to do so. 

 

A motion to call the question on the amendment was then placed before the faculty.

The motion to call the question passed.

 

The Faculty then voted on the revised amendment, as follows:

 

AMENDMENT:

 

EACH ACADEMIC DIVISION IS ALLOWED A 20% (ROUNDED UP) CAP FOR ITS FULL-TIME NON-TENURE TRACK FACULTY, WITH AN OVERALL COLLEGE-WIDE CAP OF 15% (ROUNDED UP), NOT INCLUDING FACULTY JOINTLY APPOINTED WITH THE FRANKLIN W. OLIN COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING.

 

VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT:       DEFEATED (48 IN FAVOR; 54 OPPOSED)

 

A motion to call the question on the main motion (i.e., Motion #3) was made and seconded.  The motion to call the question passed.

 

A vote was then taken on Motion #3, as follows:

 

MOTION:

 

TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE PERCENTAGE OF NON-TENURE TRACK FACULTY PER ACADEMIC DIVISION TO 20 PERCENT (ROUNDED DOWN).

 

VOTE ON MOTION #3:  DEFEATED (66 IN FAVOR; 37 OPPOSED)  (Note:  a 2/3 vote in

                                                favor of motions to change “Policies & Procedures” is required.)

 

Motion #4 was then proposed and seconded.

 

MOTION #4

 

TO PROVIDE THE ABILITY TO OFFER INITIAL MULTI-YEAR (UP TO 5-YEARS) CONTRACTS FOR NON-TENURE TRACK FACULTY.

 

Professor John Saber then proposed the following amendment to MOTION #4:

 

AMENDMENT:

 

THE DIVISION CHAIRPERSON’S RECOMMENDATION FOR AN INITIAL APPOINTMENT OF A NON-TENURE TRACK FACULTY IS TO BE DONE WITH THE CONCURRENCE OF THE DIVISION ITSELF.  ALSO, ANY CONTRACT LONGER THAN ONE YEAR IS TO BE DONE WITH THE CONCURRENCE OF THE DIVISION ITSELF.

 

 

Following a brief discussion, a vote was taken on the proposed amendment to MOTION #4; the amendment failed. 

 

VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT:    DEFEATED

 

A vote was then taken on the main motion.

 

VOTE ON MOTION #4:                  PASSED (76 IN FAVOR; 25 OPPOSED)

 

Motion #6 was then placed before the Faculty, and seconded.

 

MOTION #6

 

TO ADD SCHOLARSHIP AS A POSSIBLE CRITERION IN THE EVALUATION OF NON-TENURE TRACK FACULTY.

 

Professor Ted Grossman, as a member of the non-tenure track faculty, expressed concern that there be a clear understanding within the Appointments Committee that the criteria for evaluation of each member of the non-tenure track faculty is unique to that faculty member and that it should not be applied uniformly across all members of the non-tenure track faculty.  VP Fetters agreed and said that is why the Appointments DMB opted for the word “possible criterion.”  A vote was then taken on Motion #6.

 

VOTE ON MOTION #6:                  PASSED (86 IN FAVOR; 8 OPPOSED)

 

It was then agreed to discuss the group of amendments related to Babson’s relationship with Olin College.  Motion #2 was then made and seconded.

 

MOTION #2:

 

TO CREATE AN ADDITIONAL CATEGORY OF NON-TENURE TRACK FACULTY FOR JOINT APPOINTMENTS WITH F.W. OLIN COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

 

Professor Fleischmann placed the following amendment before the Faculty for its consideration:

 

AMENDMENT

 

THAT THE NUMBER OF JOINT APPOINTMENTS WITH F.W. OLIN COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING BE CAPPED AT 10% OF THE TOTAL COLLEGE-WIDE BABSON FACULTY.

 

VP Fetters indicated that Professor Fleischmann’s motion was acceptable to the Chairs & Deans Group and that Professor Fleischmann had already conveyed his amendment to the group beforehand.

 

VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT:                   PASSED.

 

 

A vote was then taken on the amended main motion, as follows:

 

MOTION #2 (AS AMENDED)

 

TO CREATE AN ADDITIONAL CATEGORY OF NON-TENURE TRACK FACULTY FOR JOINT APPOINTMENTS WITH F.W. OLIN COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, AND THAT THE NUMBER OF JOINT APPOINTMENTS WITH THE F.W. COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING BE CAPPED AT 10% OF THE TOTAL COLLEGE-WIDE BABSON FACULTY.

 

 

VOTE ON MOTION #2:                  PASSED (85 IN FAVOR; 10 OPPOSED)

 

Motion #5 was then placed before the Faculty, and seconded.

 

MOTION #5

 

TO SET THE TIME FRAME FOR PROMOTION OF OLIN COLLEGE JOINT APPOINTMENTS TO ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THAT OF BABSON TENURE TRACK FACULTY.

 

VOTE ON MOTION #5                   PASSED (88 IN FAVOR; 7 OPPOSED)

 

Motion #7 was placed before the Faculty, and seconded.

 

MOTION #7

 

TO PROVIDE CRITERIA FOR APPOINTMENT/PROMOTION TO SENIOR LECTURER.

 

The motion was seconded.  Professor Nan Langowitz made the following point of clarification in response to a concern voiced earlier by Professor Grossman:  This type of evaluation is to be tailored to the specific individual.

 

VOTE ON MOTION #7:                  PASSED (89 IN FAVOR; 7 OPPOSED)

 

Motion #8 was placed before the faculty, and seconded.

 

MOTION #8

 

TO PROVIDE A WINDOW OF TIME DURING WHICH A FACULTY MEMBER MAY HAVE HIS/HER TENURE CASE REVIEWED.

 

VOTE ON MOTION #8:                  PASSED (84 IN FAVOR; 10 OPPOSED)

 

Motion #9 was placed before the Faculty, and seconded.

 

 

MOTION #9

 

TO ENHANCE THE CRITERIA FOR PROMOTION TO FULL PROFESSOR.

 

 

The fuller explanation provided by VP Fetters reads:  “Leadership” is a criterion used by recent Appointments DMBs when considering promotions to Full Professor.  Approval of this motion would explicitly include “leadership” (meant to contrast with just doing the minimal requirements) in the criteria to be considered by the Appointments DMB in its deliberations.  Further, this motion will encourage and enhance the chairperson’s and AVP’s abilities to mentor faculty in the various aspects of leadership.  The proposed wording in policies and procedures is designed to allow trade-offs in the locus of leadership and the expectation of scholarship.  For example, if an individual is acknowledged for significant leadership at Babson, the Appointments DMB may weigh this more heavily than (scholarly) leadership outside of Babson.  On the other hand, if an individual is an acknowledged leader in his or her area of expertise, the Appointments DMB may weigh leadership outside Babson more heavily than inside Babson.”  The motion was seconded.

 

Professor John McKenzie asked for some examples – internally or externally – of what this proposed motion entails.  Professor Kimball responded by saying this motion reflects what was going on in the minds of the Appointments DMB committee members and would allow new faculty to have a more varied palate to show their contributions to the College; one way would be through leadership or service on a major committee.  Externally, there is no exclusive list, but acknowledgement that a faculty member was a thought leader in some area or an officer of a scholarly group would also be permissible.  

 

Professor Toni Lester suggested that if this proposed change is about leadership – why not have the wording explicitly in there? 

 

Discussion ensued with regard to the wording of MOTION #9.  A motion was made by Professor Allan Cohen to add the words:  “and/or leadership in one’s field of specialization.”  The motion was seconded.

 

Professor Nan Langowitz disagreed with the proposed solution.  She felt that this the subject was covered in section (d) of the Policies and Procedures and that we should leave this sentence out.

Professor Steve Collins commented no one could not be appointed as a Full Professor without  showing displayed leadership. Professor Ash Rao supported the amended wording.

 

The question was called to vote on the amended wording in “Policies & Procedures” related to Motion #9, i.e., to change the wording in “Policies & Procedures” III. (A) 7. to read “leadership at Babson or other academic institution and/or leadership in one’s field of specialization.”

 

VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT:                PASSED (48 IN FAVOR; 30 OPPOSED)

A vote was then taken on Motion #9 (as amended).

 

VOTE ON MOTON #9:                   PASSED (63 IN FAVOR; 26 OPPOSED)

 

New Business:

Professor JP Jeannet strongly urged that there be an effort to re-work MOTION #3; and he encourage Chairs and Deans Group to analyze the wording of this motion and bring it back for another discussion at a future faculty meeting.  Professor Saber added that he fully supports JP’s suggestion.

 

Professor John Anderson said that with regard to John Saber’s earlier amendment to MOTION #3, he would like to propose the following motion:

 

“I move that the Faculty request clarification from the Deans and Chairs concerning the procedure within the academic divisions for the appointment of full-time faculty.”   The motion was seconded and it was voted unanimously in favor to do so.

 

 Professor Nan Langowitz advised that theAppointments DMB would be submitting their annual written report to faculty in the next few days.  She expressed appreciation for all of the feedback and input given to the committee.

 

 The meeting adjourned at 5:40 p.m.