Faculty Development Committee
Annual Report 2005/2006

Membership:

Alford, M. (BADM), Johnson, K. (BIOL), McAfee, L. (CHEM), Mays, Tim (CIVL), Brown, K. (EDUC), Barsanti, R. (ELEC), Leon, P. (ENGL), Wilson, G. (HESS), Neulander, J (HIST), Carter, E. (LIBR), Greim, P. (MACS, chair), Skow-Obenaus, K. (MLNG), Hilleke, R. (PHYS), Moreland, L. (PSCJ), DeRoma, V. (PSYC).

Activities:

During the school year 2005/2006, the full committee met twice physically and had additional discussions and votes by e-mail, including the four rounds of proposal evaluations. 

Most of the 65 proposals received during the year satisfied the criteria and were recommended for funding. The provost approved all committee recommendations. The amounts granted ranged from $120 to (the allowed maximum of) $2,000; the average grant amount was $1,100.

The committee fine-tuned its recommendation mechanism. Each member rates each proposal as 0, 1, 2, or 3. The rating 0 means: not recommended for funding; 1: no objections against funding if sufficient funds are available; 2: should be funded; 3: should be funded with priority. If a vote is for 0 or 1, an explanation must accompany the vote. The committee recommends funding of a proposal if its average rating is at least 1.8, or (new) a 2/3 majority of the voting members voted 2 or 3. Information about individual ratings does not leave the committee, but the average ratings and the comments justifying 0s and 1s are passed on to the provost.

The committee evaluates proposals four times year. This includes activities in a later quarter if early registration deadlines or other circumstances justify an early consideration. The committee decides on a case-by-case basis if it considers a request for funding an activity in an earlier quarter of the same fiscal year.

The committee considered joint proposals of two or more faculty members, where each participant demonstrated that his/her role in the project met the funding criteria.

On two occasions, an applicant asked permission to use the approved funds for a modified project. The committee policy: 1. Details of a funded project, such as travel date and mode, can be modified as long as the facts justifying (the funding of) the project do not change. 2. Funds granted for a specific project cannot be used for another project that was not recommended by the committee. 3. However, if these funds are not used, then they should not count towards the $2000 maximum. In that case, the committee would consider a new application in a regular round of evaluations.