Minutes for Friday, Dec. 12, 2003 FECC

In attendance:  Caroline Perkins, Shirley Lumpkin, Kay Wildman, James Sottile, Sandra Mossa, Janet Dooley, Corley Dennison, Jerry Jones, Uday Tate, Michael Castellani, Michael Cornfeld, Don Van Horn, Ruth Ann Murphy, Scott Dennishy (For Dr. Shao), Elaine Baker 

Call to Order 

Conference Call with Fairmont State:

To summarize the results of the discussion, the following points were made by the committee developing an Arreola system for making merit pay awards:

a.  Followed the same procedures we have with book and workshop.

b.  After 2 years are in the final stage of developing an Arreola style instrument and have done a pilot with 20% of faculty being evaluated by the instrument.

c.  Created institutional parameters (% of role) and had each college come up with own lists.

d.  Believed the source of resistance was the work involved in developing such an instrument and doubts that numbers should be valued over words.

e.  Believed trial run will convince doubters, as will the encouragement for each school to develop its own values and views (flexibility).

f.  Believe strongly in Arreola system and recommend a committee stay close to what he recommends.

g.  Believe the danger is developing too complicated an instrument.

h.  Consider everything still in flux and subject to continuing conversations.

i.  Suggested that institutionalizing system in period of no merit money and no raises was actually a good thing: low stakes

j.  Believe that Chancellor’s directive is for all of raise money to be merit. They interpret the Chancellor’s policy to mean almost all raise money, close to 100%, is to be based on merit, rather than equity or longevity (as in the past).

To summarize the advice the Fairmont State folks had to offer:

 1.  Just struggle through the steps and be willing to come back and start a piece over.

 2.  Trust yourselves.

3.  Go back and read the relevant chapter in the Arreola book. 

After the conclusion of the phone call, the minutes from the last meeting, as amended to include attendees, were approved. 

The committee then discussed the various models of arriving at an OCR (overall composite rating) contributed by Jim Sottile, Janet Dooly, and Elaine Baker.

It was moved and seconded and passed that the committee agreed to commit to the OCR direction for the evaluation system. 

A lengthy discussion then ensued about the recommendation from the Merit Subcommittee.  The whole committee then passed the following:

      “Merit money when it comes will be distributed to colleges in proportion to continuing fulltime tenured and probationary tenure track faculty and fulltime continuing appointments (library), contingent on 51% merit distribution and merit money going into the base.

 Janet Dooley agreed to find out about whether the proposed merit increases will go into the base.

 Janet Dooley presented a point of information about the AEI increment being discussed/presented at the next faculty senate and FECC meetings.

 The next meeting of the FECC will be January 16, 2004, in MSC 2E10.