Leadership Board Meeting Minutes
April 19th, 2011
- Location: CMC 319
- Secretary: Laura Michel
In a brief report to the Leadership Board, the CEDI co-chairs reported that they will be meeting with the Benefits Committee later in the afternoon and with President Poskanzer on Friday, where both the Workplace Environment Task Force proposal and the Welcoming Environment recommendations will be discussed.
Task Force and Action Team Reports
Kaaren Williamsen reported that the Sexual Misconduct Committee will have its first meeting of the term on Thursday, where they will pick up on their work from the fall regarding the consensual relations policy. She added that, since the group last met, Joanne Mullen gave a report to the FAC and is slate to present to the May Faculty Meeting. Michael McNally added, this may be a good opportunity to explicitly talk about the structure and goals of CEDI with the faculty.
For the Learning Environment Inside the Classroom Task Force, Cindy Blaha informed the Leadership Board that a meeting is, in fact, scheduled, where they will continue work on a textbook ‘voucher’ program as well as discuss how the group can best use the information gathered through the recent student survey.
Ann Iijima reported that, in the most recent meeting, the Workplace Environment Task Force came to the decision that although they have realized many of their agenda goals for the year, there is still much that can be done, and the group should be ongoing.
The Action Team on Community Concerns and Procedures has met twice since the last Leadership Board meeting, reported Bill North. They continued conversations regarding how to best conclude the Action Team’s one-year assignment. The group hopes to, by sixth or seventh week, have created a document that outlines recommendations and observations and identifies the go-to people that serve as a point of entry for various procedures. The document, Bill North added, will not outline any specific procedures. The group decided that they still lacked a lot of information that would allow them to truly recommend a thoughtful, specific, procedure. Thus, rather than trying to implement policies from the top-down, the Action Team on Community Concerns and Procedures’ will outline a framework for procedures that can be implemented at a local level.
Carolyn Fure-Slocum reported that the Learning Environment Outside the Classroom Task Force has met once this term, but with only half the committee able to attend the meeting. Steve Kennedy has rejuvenated the faculty mentoring program, thus far over 30 faculty members have agreed to participate in the program. Unlike the program in its last iteration, however, OIIL and TRiO will serve as gatekeepers, thus ensuring that the program will continue to exist even with changes in faculty participation.
Finally, Julie Thornton reported that the Campus Community Expectations Action Team is scheduled to meet next week, and will begin to plan an event that will bring the community together to discuss how to best welcome the Class of 2015 to Carleton.
Concluding Action Team Work
Co-chair Michael McNally noted that, as the 2010-2011 academic year winds down, and the Action Teams come to the end of their one-year duration, the individual action teams and the Leadership Board must discuss what will and should survive of the work done this year, as well as how to keep recommendations and discussions moving through the governance system.
Bill North, as chair of the Action Team on Community Concerns and Procedures, noted that his group has come to the conclusion that their objective is to turn over the recommendations to CEDI, the role of the action team is not to take the document through the further steps and conversation, rather, that is the purview of the larger CEDI structure.
Julie Thornton noted that her group, the Campus Community Expectations Action Team, has struggled all year to exactly define its scope and purpose. In the end, they set about to create opportunities for people to talk about values. And, while the idea of encouraging meaningful conversation should continue, these opportunities could exist outside of the group itself. Michael McNally added that, despite the Action Team’s reluctance to formalize any ‘community expectations’ on paper and seem to make assumptions for the entire campus, based upon recent broader conversations about the order and priorities of the ‘assumptions’ for strategic planning, a set of talking points could be useful.
To begin the conversation about the strategic planning process, Andrea Nixon reminded the Leadership Board that the method will involve using assumptions and questions to get at conversations about larger issues and topics about Carleton’s future. This, of course, will be a very people intensive process, and, thus, CEDI needs to decide how it should go about continuing its own work while ensuring that representatives from CEDI projects also have the time to participate in the planning process.