I. PRELIMINARIES
 

A. Attending: Belzer (Chair), Bosworth, Das, Dean, Enos, Kruger, Lung, Nitse, Price, Wabrek

Excused/Absent: Devine, Fisher, Jones, Kunicki, Hjelm, Paulson, Pehrsson, Egger

B. Approval of the CTL minutes for January 28, 2000

Comment was made that the next two meetings would occur on the fourth Friday of the month to accommodate secretarial support for the meeting.

MOTION: Moved by Nitse.  Second by Das to approve minutes from January 28, 2000 with no changes.

ACTION: Unanimously passed.

A. Report from Task Force on proposal for Teaching and Learning Resource Center
Task force members: Sharolyn Belzer, Philip Nitse, and Ken Bosworth

Phil Nitse wrote a Justification for a Revitalized Center for Teaching and Learning, which Ken Bosworth and Sharolyn Belzer modified slightly and presented to Council members.  Sharolyn pointed out the documents sent to council members on goals and rationales for faculty
development programs and defining our mission (written last year) were also
intended to inform our discussion on the Center.

Discussion ensued on the Justification for a Revised Center for Teaching and Learning document.  Joe Kruger asked about the redundancy in the document.  For example, academic dishonesty fell out under all three categories: Technology Related Issues, General Instructional Methodology, and Student Interactions.  The suggestion was made that we categorize some of the ideas for faculty development into a general category that encompasses all categories.  It was suggested that
Virtual Technology be added to the document.  Sharolyn indicated that she would restructure the document, changing the language to clarify points and reduce overlap.

Discussion on the required verses desirable characteristics for a Director of the Center followed.  Council members generally agreed that the Director should serve as a consultant for faculty and that ISU should hire a Director that had the experience to train faculty in pedagogy.  Members considered whether the position should be a rotating position (assuming an internal candidate).  A lack of continuity for the Director position was cited as the primary disadvantage for a rotating
position.  Generally, members agreed that rotating the position would not be a good idea.  I was also suggested that an internal and external search for a Director could be conducted, resulting in the selection of the best candidate.

Members indicated that a Center Director should be required to have teaching experience at the university level, a terminal degree in their field, a 12-month contract, with full salary paid through hard money (and if necessary, funding for the Center for the first year paid using soft money).  Faculty experience was thought to be necessary because it would give the Director credibility with our faculty.  How much faculty experience should be required was discussed.  After considerable
debate, members generally agreed that a minimum of 3 years experience on campus should be required, with 5 years experience preferred.

Desirable characteristics for a Center Director were then considered. Members also suggested that the Director should have experience (of some kind) in teaching methods, either through research or experience in training.  Phil indicated that experience in training need not be limited to faculty because those in business often had training opportunities.  Members also considered administrator experience to be desirable but not required.  It was felt that the Director would primarily be serving faculty, so a Director could gain skills in administration if they had little experience in this area.  To be successful, it would be necessary for the Center and the Director to have support from the administration.  Support from the administration on the Center was thought to be a positive recruiting tool for the Director position.

It was suggested that Terry lay be invited to the next meeting as a guest.  He could provide input on Technology Issues.  The Council could work in conjunction with him on pedagogical issues that involve technology.

Council members were encouraged to email Sharolyn within a week to 10 days if they had further suggestions for the required or desirable characteristics for the Center Director position.

B. Guidelines for Assessing Goals and Report Summarizing Goal 9 Sharolyn distributed a handout prepared by Barbara Bain last fall on Guidelines for Assessing Goals.  A question was asked on whether or not the Council should be assessing goals.  Older Council members indicated
that the Council has been assessing the general education goals, one goal at a time for almost a decade.  Members noted that all goals have not been assessed.  The lengthy deliberation on each goal did not allow the Council to revisit goals in a timely fashion.  Some members thought
that the guidelines for assessing goals provided Council members with a reasonable procedure for assessing each goal.

MOTION: Moved by Nitse. Seconded by no one to adopt the Guidelines for Assessing Goals document.

ACTION: Tabled until our next meeting to give members an opportunity to review the Goal 9 Report and think about the Guidelines for Assessing Goals document.

C. Possible email distribution of Agendas and Minutes Sharolyn suggested that it would be easier to distribute agendas and minutes to Council members by email only.  She asked if there were
any objections to doing this.  Since there were no objections, it was agreed that future agendas and minutes would be distributed by email.
Sharolyn indicated that if members not present at this meeting contacted her because they would prefer to have agendas and minutes delivered by mail, she would mail the documents to these members.

 D. Upcoming Agenda Items for Future Meetings Sharolyn suggested that members continue to think about topics for discussion groups (perhaps for next fall).  She indicated that the academic year was coming to an end and we need to reach closure on a number of unresolved issues, including a proposal for the Center for Teaching and Learning.

Next meeting, March 24, 2000 at 3:15, room 102.

Adjourned 4:15PM.