Original PDF document

MARCH 11, 2008
CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 12:25 p.m. in room 121 Armitage Hall, Dr. Bill Saidel, President, presiding.
The minutes from the l\Jovember 2007 meeting were APPROVED, VOICE VOTE. Also, minutes from the February s” minutes were APPROVED, VOICE VOTE. Please note that Dr. Jeffrey Sill should be listed as present at the February s” meeting.
Dr. Saidel opened discussion about the new Provost appointment noting the unusually small size of the Camden campus and the importance of discussing expansion with each candidate. He noted that one candidate favored the size of our campus. He expressed concern about the lack of Camden’s “boutique” departments being addressed by the candidates, and the candidates being overly sensitive to community services rather than to each discipline.
Dr. Saidel invited Dr. Marty Rosenberg to address the Senate. Dr.
Rosenberg has been on at least two dozen searches, two of which
were Dean searches. He stated the urgency of everyone who did not
attend the candidates’ presentations, to watch videos and to give their
opinion to the search committee. He noted that an outside firm has
been hired to help with a successful search.
Up to this point in the interview process, candidates have had privacy
rights so that their names cannot be announced. Now that the top five
candidates have been chosen, their privacy privileges are revoked. Dr.
Rosenberg expressed the absolute necessity to get information
beneath each candidate’s C.V. and to check out facts; dig deeply into a
candidate’s background.
What will make a good Provost? Operational experience is not the
most important asset. The new Provost should have relevant
experience in managing people, overseeing resources, planning, and
working well with people above them. The number one character of the Provost should be values. Does this person see our strengths and is this person willing to work with these strengths? How can this person help us move forward? This person needs to want the Provost job for the right reason; he/she gets satisfaction helping others succeed (although not really being noticed). Again, Dr. Rosenberg stated the importance of looking into each C.V. and talk to colleagues on and off campus. The new Provost needs to relate to what we are about and must be interested in helping move us all forward.
Dr. Louis Horowitz, also an invited guest speaker, stated that the low attendance at the candidate meetings was startling! Everyone needs to know the importance of participation in the Provost selection. She indicated that as an outside representative for an accreditation team evaluating the University of Binghamton, she came into contact with one of our candidates. The person stated that he/she was currently a Dean there. It turns out the person had not been a Dean for over three months. What kind of search is going on? It is very important that a full airing and full discussion be given to each candidate.
Dr. Horowitz also indicated that the top candidate from the University of Baltimore has no Arts and Sciences experience. Upon examination of the curriculum at the University of Baltimore it is very much like the University of Phoenix with no sciences or humanities courses. We need to be very concerned! Everyone needs to put pressure on the Search Committee. Don’t be afraid; the worst thing is to get a bad Provost! We should take our time and not be too speedy in making a selection.
A motion was made to hold a meeting with the entire faculty on Tuesday, March zs”. after the fifth candidate’s meeting. The motion was APPROVED, VOICE VOTE.
Further discussion took place in which it was stated that of the 50 candidates, 45 had no scholarship. Each candidate must see Camden as a scholar, teacher, and administrator; not a stepping stone in his/her career.
It was noted that the fifth candidate from Temple University may be our person. It was suggested that we shouldn’t rush to make judgment. What if every candidate is not suitable? President McCormick is willing to let Acting Provost Margaret IYJarsh continue to hold that position if needed for another year. It was noted that the
New Jersey budget can be a problem recruiting candidates. Who wants to step into a job with budget cuts taking place?
Again, it was emphasized that the new Provost should have hands on immediate experience, character, wisdom and vision.
A motion was made for the Faculty Senate to meet again on April 1,
2008 to cover the other items on the agenda that were not addressed.
Motion was passed APPROVED, VOICE VOTE.
3. Dr. Saidel asked, “Is there rationale for a three Campus Faculty Council?” It was decided to address this question at the April 1,2008 meeting.
IVJeeting ended at 1; 15.
IVJEMBERS PRESENT: Saidel, Tarbell, Schiavo, McIlroy, Maslen, J. Smith, Ledoux, Sill, Rushing, Lees, VanderVen, Still, Karel, Li, Chao, Gurfinkiel, Shienbaum, Bezrukova, VanTil, Meloy, Hippolyte, Herrera
MEfVlBERS ABSENT: Espiritu, Tan, Shankman, Duffy, Caputo
MEMBERS EXCUSED: Vallone, Johann, J. Robinson, Adelson
Submitted by:
\ /\ \.” ,i
\ . \ \
\j Joseph C. Schiavo, Secretary Faculty Senate (2007-2008)