1 / 23

MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES

MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES. Department Meeting April 8, 2011 9:15 AM – 10:45 AM CBC C146. Last Friday’s EC Meeting at 10am. Like everyone else, the Dean’s office is also now computing numbers Important to refer to OUR information as our information computed by DMS

kiara
Download Presentation

MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES Department Meeting April 8, 2011 9:15 AM – 10:45 AM CBC C146

  2. Last Friday’s EC Meeting at 10am. • Like everyone else, the Dean’s office is also now computing numbers • Important to refer to OUR information as our information computed by DMS • Recall the chart on next page, which has been handed out various times to a number of people: Dr. Bowers when visiting DMS, all Dean candidates last year, etc. • GeoSciences Chair seems “concerned” about DMS cuts, though they have so many more additional faculty lines per FTE. • Keep in mind Peg/Wanda have been “friends” of DMS: I think it is important to isolate those involved in any attacks.

  3. Geosciences taught: • Fall 2010 Lectures: 4,105 student credit hours (1318 students) • Fall 2010 Labs: 494 student credit hours (865 students) • Some at 0 credits, some at 1 credit, one at 4 credits. • Spring 2011 lectures: 4,351 student credit hours (1361 students) • Spring 2011 labs: 692 student credit hours (1121 students) • Salary: $2,096,721.32 (does not include Peg) • not sure how much if any is soft money • Besides faculty ranks with the usual roman numerals III and IV, these includes three Administrative Assistants(usual levels), • two at rank 3 (lab managers on A contracts), • one 2 (web/graphics/GIS specialist on A contract), and • three 0’s (Assoc. Research Prof. on A contract, Assist. Research Prof. with A contract, Assist. Prof in Residence with B contract) • DMS taught: • Fall 2010 lectures (includes M95/96): 18,532 student credit hours • 5,863 students • To exclude Math 95/96, subtract appr. 4,155 credit hours to get 14,377 credit hours. • Reports will incorrectly indicate over 19,000 student credit hours • Reports will also falsely add credits for the discussion sessions • Spring 2011 lectures: rough estimate15,089 student credit hours • rough estimate 4800 students • To exclude Math 95/96, subtract appr. 3,624 credit hours to get 11,465 credit hours • Reports will incorrectly increase student credit hours • Reports will also falsely add credits for the discussion sessions • Salaries: $2,706,989.04

  4. Combined total credit hours of 35,484 without Math 95/96 and including their labs. • 25,842 DMS credit hours, or over 72.827% of the total. • Total combined salaries: $4,803,710.36. • 72.827% of this is $3,498,398.144 in comparison to our $2,706,989.04 • (difference easily includes 10 faculty lines)

  5. SKIP • This percentage is DMS’s. Total faculty lines are … • Grant argument (but majority of grant funding goes back to the Department and members of that department). • Without FTEs generating faculty lines, there is no faculty line (and no grant). • It is helpful for our faculty to be aware of some of our senior faculty’s contributions. • Dr. Verma’s involvement with Drs. Ananda, Bellomo, me with below calculus classes. • In particular, Math 126 and 132. • # of students • Extremely important with GA’s as primary instructors. • Do crazy things to offset the impact of the Department final • Dr. Bhatnagar’s teaching of Math 711, 712, 714.

  6. 3/8/2011 - Target Vertical Budget Cuts COLLEGE DEPARTMENT PROGRAM/CUT FTE Loss AMOUNT Academic Success Ctr. Academic Success Ctr. Athletic Academic Advisors, support staff 6.32 $386,000 ACADEMIC SUCCESS CTR. TOTAL - 3/28/11 revised 6.32 $386,000 Academic Success Ctr. Academic Success Ctr. Athletic Academic Advisors, support staff 4.32 $262,345 ACADEMIC SUCCESS CTR. TOTAL - OLD 4.32 $262,345 Allied Health Science Kinesiology Athletic Training 3.00 $322,000 CLS Program Elimination - Bal. FY12 1.00 $83,917 Health Physics/Diag. Nuclear Medicine Program 2.00 $208,000 Kinesiology Nutrition 4.00 $351,300 SCH. ALLIED HEALTH SCIENCES TOTAL - 3/28/11 revised 10.00 $965,217 Allied Health Science Kinesiology Athletic Training 3.00 $322,000 CLS Program Elimination - Bal. FY12 1.00 $83,917 Health Physics/Diag. Nuclear Medicine Program 2.00 $208,000 SCH. ALLIED HEALTH SCIENCES TOTAL – OLD 6.00 $613,917 Business College-wide Admin. Restructure 8.00 $524,000 Mgmt. Inform. Sys. Restructure College 2.00 $205,600 Marketing Restructure College 4.00 $461,000 Management Restructure College 5.00 $607,000 Economics Real Estate 2.00 $293,000 Various TBD @$135K each 5.00 $675,000 BUSINESS TOTAL - 3/28/11 revised 26.00 $2,765,600 Business College-wide Admin. Restructure 8.00 $540,000 Mgmt. Inform. Sys. Restructure UG Program- college-wide 3.00 $405,000 Marketing Various Rank for these 3 depts. 5.00 $675,000 Management Based upon $135K (Sal. & Fringes) per FTE 7.00 $945,000 BUSINESS TOTAL - OLD 23.00 $2,565,000

  7. Community Health Sci. Health Promotion Health Promotion Program 2.00 $257,269 COMMUNITY HEALTH SCIENCES TOTAL - 3/28/11 revised 2.00 $257,269 Community Health Sci. Health Promotion Health Promotion Program 2.00 $257,269 COMMUNITY HEALTH SCIENCES TOTAL - OLD 2.00 $257,269 Education College Restructure to 3 Departments 7.00 $1,371,094 Educ. Leadership Program Elimination - Bal. FY12 4.00 $442,000 Sports Educ. Program Elimination - Bal. FY12 2.00 $213,000 EDUCATION TOTAL - 3/28/11 revised 13.00 $2,026,094 Education College Restructure to 3 Departments 7.00 $1,371,094 Educ. Leadership Program Elimination - Bal. FY12 4.00 $442,000 Sports Educ. Program Elimination - Bal. FY12 2.00 $213,000 EDUCATION TOTAL - OLD 13.00 $2,026,094 Engineering College-wide Open faculty lines 6.00 $698,000 Informatics to C. S. Program Elimination - Bal. FY12 3.00 $547,000 Construction Mgmt. Construction Management Program 4.00 $451,000 ENGINEERING TOTAL - 3/28/11 revised 13.00 $1,696,000 Engineering Elec. & Comp. Engr. Electical Engr. - restructure 6.00 $698,000 Informatics to C. S. Program Elimination - Bal. FY12 3.00 $547,000 Construction Mgmt. Contstruction Management Program 4.00 $451,000 ENGINEERING TOTAL - OLD 13.00 $1,696,000

  8. Fine Arts Various Artist in Residence - All Depts. 5.00 $338,000 Art Photography 2.00 $236,000 Art Printmaking 1.00 $121,500 Gerontology Gerontology 1.00 $80,576 Theatre Sr. Adult Theatre 1.00 $120,000 Dance, Arch & Theatre Faculty 3.00 $233,000 FINE ARTS TOTAL - 3/28/11 revised 13.00 $1,129,076 Fine Arts Various Artist in Residence - All Depts. 5.00 $338,000 Art Photography 2.00 $236,000 Gerontology Gerontology 1.00 $80,576 Theatre Sr. Adult Theatre 1.00 $120,000 Dance, Arch & Theatre Faculty 3.00 $233,000 FINE ARTS TOTAL – OLD 12.00 $1,007,576 Hotel College Recreation to TCA Recreation Sports Management-entire prog. 4.00 $539,000 Various Curriculum Restructure 4.00 $480,000 Tourism & Convention Faculty lines 2.00 $239,400 Hotel Admin. Support Staff 1.00 $63,777 All depts. Operating $153,500 HOTEL TOTAL - 3/28/11 revised 11.00 $1,475,677 Hotel College Recreation to TCA Recreation Sports Management-entire prog. 4.00 $539,000 Various Curriculum Restrcuture 4.00 $480,000 Tourism & Convention Faculty lines 2.00 $239,400 Hotel Admin. Support Staff 1.00 $63,777 All depts. Operating $153,500 HOTEL TOTAL - OLD 11.00 $1,475,677 Liberal Arts WRIN Women's Research Institute of NV 1.00 $55,000 Women's Studies Women's Studies 5.00 $512,000 English Professional Writing 4.00 $349,000 Philosophy Philosophy 11.00 $1,070,000 LIBERAL ARTS TOTAL - 3/28/11 revised 21.00 $1,986,000 Liberal Arts WRIN Women's Research Institute of NV 1.00 $55,000 Women's Studies Women's Studies 5.00 $512,000 Philosophy Philosophy 11.00 $1,070,000 LIBERAL ARTS TOTAL - OLD 17.00 $1,637,000

  9. Libraries Library Support Serv. Library Support Staff 7.00 $421,007 Librarians Librarians 4.00 $443,200 LIBRARIES TOTAL - 3/28/11 revised 11.00 $864,207 Libraries Library Support Serv. Library Support Staff 7.00 $421,007 Librarians Librarians 4.00 $443,200 LIBRARIES TOTAL - OLD 11.00 $864,207 Sciences Life Sciences Eliminate all but one M.S. track title track 3.00 $277,000 Chemistry in each department 2.00 $215,000 Geoscience Accompany with corresponding faculty line cuts 4.00 $546,000 Math 1.00 $97,000 Physics 3.00 $183,000 Dean's Office combination, salary, wages, operating 0.00 $17,000 SCIENCES TOTAL - 3/28/11 revised 13.00 $1,335,000 Sciences Life Sciences Elim. all M.S. programs, some oper./wages 3.00 $230,920 Chemistry Elim. all M.S. programs, some oper./wages 2.00 $164,000 Geoscience Elim. all M.S. programs, some oper./wages 5.00 $388,000 Math Elim. all M.S. programs, some oper./wages 1.00 $102,000 Physics Elim. all M.S. programs, some oper./wages 3.00 $247,000 Dean's Office combination, salary, wages, operating 0.00 $17,000 SCIENCES TOTAL - OLD 14.00 $1,148,920

  10. Libraries Library Support Serv. Library Support Staff 7.00 $421,007 Librarians Librarians 4.00 $443,200 LIBRARIES TOTAL - 3/28/11 revised 11.00 $864,207 Libraries Library Support Serv. Library Support Staff 7.00 $421,007 Librarians Librarians 4.00 $443,200 LIBRARIES TOTAL - OLD 11.00 $864,207 Sciences Life Sciences Eliminate all but one M.S. track title track 3.00 $277,000 Chemistry in each department 2.00 $215,000 Geoscience Accompany with corresponding faculty line cuts 4.00$546,000 Math 1.00 $97,000 Physics 3.00 $183,000 Dean's Office combination, salary, wages, operating 0.00 $17,000 SCIENCES TOTAL - 3/28/11 revised 13.00 $1,335,000 Sciences Life Sciences Elim. all M.S. programs, some oper./wages 3.00 $230,920 Chemistry Elim. all M.S. programs, some oper./wages 2.00 $164,000 Geoscience Elim. all M.S. programs, some oper./wages 5.00 $388,000 Math Elim. all M.S. programs, some oper./wages 1.00 $102,000 Physics Elim. all M.S. programs, some oper./wages 3.00 $247,000 Dean's Office combination, salary, wages, operating 0.00 $17,000 SCIENCES TOTAL - OLD 14.00 $1,148,920 Urban Affairs Social Work Eliminate BSW 5.00 $436,500 Sch. Environ. Public Aff. Environmental Program 5.15 $525,000 EDL to SEPA Program Elimination - Bal. FY12 6.00 $762,000 Combine depts. Combine Journalism/Commun. Studies 3.00 $320,000 URBAN AFFAIRS TOTAL - 3/28/11 revised 19.15 $2,043,500 Urban Affairs Social Work Eliminate entire Dept./Programs 15.00 $1,705,506 Sch. Envirn. Public Aff. Environmental Program 5.15 $525,000 EDL to SEPA Program Elimination - Bal. FY12 6.00 $762,000 Combine depts. Combine Journalism/Commun. Studies 3.00 $320,000 URBAN AFFAIRS TOTAL - OLD 29.15 $3,312,506

  11. Vice Prov. Ed Outreach Move to soft VICE PROVOST EDUC. OUTREACH TOTAL - 3/28/11 revised 3.50 $320,000 Vice Prov. Ed Outreach Move to soft VICE PROVOST EDUC. OUTREACH TOTAL – OLD 3.50 $320,000 Vice Provost Info. Tech. Acad. Comp. Replace. VICE PROVOST INFO. TECHNOLOGY TOTAL - 3/28/11 revised 0.00 $275,000 Vice Provs. Info. Tech. Acad. Comp. Replace. VICE PROVOST INFO. TECHNOLOGY TOTAL - OLD 0.00 $275,000 Various Various Reorganization @$100,000 each - 3/28/11 revised 22.00 $2,165,545 TOTAL ABOVE - 3/28/11 revised 183.97 $19,690,185 VP Student Services - credit for add. Cuts $227,700 MSW Diff. Tuition (rough estimate) 1.00 $300,000 Omnibus additional savings/Opportunity Savings/GIF offset $554,115 TOTAL - 3/28/11 revised $20,772,000 Provost Target for Cuts - 3/28/11 revised $20,772,000 TOTAL ABOVE 158.97 $17,461,511

  12. Information Committee possibly needed • Updated information needed • To use when needed to defend the Department • Need to use sparingly: don’t want to become this year’s firemen. • Need to use our own information, so as to continue to receive information from other units. • Old information that needs to be updated includes: • Annual FTE and budgeted instructional faculty chart (see later page) • 2006 Advisory Committee’s comparison of DMS with other Mathematical Sciences Departments. (see next page) • Intention is to help compliment any information that our faculty and/or the front office produces. • Any old reports/information is greatly appreciated. • E.g. Phanord/Verma report. • We need to carefully start putting into people’s mind (subliminal) the need for an equitable re-proportioning of UNLV faculty lines.

  13. Fall 2010 UNLV headcount: 27,737 Data: Data on revenue: In the 2005-06 academic year, the math department taught 1304 FTEs, while the University taught 19804 FTEs. Thus, 6.6% of all FTEs were taught by our department. The cost of teaching these students was $219 M, or $11065 per FTE. This expense was covered by tuition and fees, and through the general fund, which covers the difference between in-state and out-of-state tuition. Thus, the Department was responsible for generating $14.4 M in revenue. By way of comparison, the rest of the College taught 1723 FTEs, or 8.7%. They therefore generated $19.1 M in revenue. Because the Department has no labs or expensive equipment, grants in Mathematics are both harder to get and smaller compared to grants in the other four disciplines of the college. The entire college generated $8.9 M in grants, so the rest of the college brought in perhaps as much as $28.0 M. The Department was therefore responsible for generating 34% of the revenue generated by the College.

  14. Annual FTE and budgeted instructional faculty Mathematical Sciences Biological Sciences Chemistry Geoscience Physics Civil and Environmental Engineering Computer Science Electrical & Computer Engineering Mechanical Engineering 1996-97 Annual FTE 748.4 493.6 259.2 161.6 198.7 172 297.7 101.3 87.9 1996-97 Budgeted Instructional Faculty 31.00 21.32 12.00 13.00 14.5 11.7 12 12 9 1996-97 Student Faculty Ratios 24/1 23/1 22/1 12/1 14/1 15/1 25/1 8/1 10/1 1997-98 Annual FTE 786.8 488.8 252.8 164.4 224.4 179 309.5 106 90.1 1997-98 Budgeted Instructional Faculty 30.00 23.00 13.00 13.67 15.5 12 11 12 10 1997-98 Student Faculty Ratios 26/1 21/1 19/1 12/1 14/1 15/1 28/1 9/1 9/1 1998-99 Annual FTE 917.0 493.4 253.2 172.2 216.8 163.9 331.9 104.8 88.1 1998-99 Budgeted Instructional Faculty 30.0 21.34 12.67 15.00 14.17 13.00 11.00 12.00 11.50 1998-99 Student Faculty Ratios 31/1 23/1 20/1 11/1 15/1 13/1 30/1 9/1 8/1 1999-00 Annual FTE 906.4 481.2 244.7 176.3 212.3 159.5 323.4 93.6 73.6 1999-00 Budgeted Instructional Faculty 27.00 21.17 15.67 15.67 15.5 14 13 12 11 1999-00 Student Faculty Ratios 34/1 23/1 16/1 11/1 14/1 11/1 25/1 8/1 7/1 2000-01 Annual FTE 968.7 486.9 237.8 178.7 217.6 153.9 335.2 106.3 78.7 2000-01 Budgeted Instructional Faculty 28 21.50 17.00 15.67 16.50 13 13 12 11 2000-01 Student Faculty Ratios 35/1 23/1 14/1 11/1 13/1 12/1 26/1 9/1 7/1 2001-02 Annual FTE 1089.4 537.2 259.2 190.3 238.0 152.4 326 110.3 83.6 2001-02 Budgeted Instructional Faculty 28.00 19.01 15.00 15.40 17.50 15 13 12.67 11.67 2001-02 Student Faculty Ratios 39/1 28/1 17/1 13/1 14/1 10/1 25/1 9/1 7/1 2002-03 Annual FTE 1174.1 584.1 280.5 194.4 251.1 175.4 320.7 118 85.6 2002-03 Budgeted Instructional Faculty 28.00 23.00 16.00 16.00 16.17 15 13 12 10 2002-03 Student Faculty Ratios 42/1 25/1 18/1 12/1 16/1 12/1 25/1 10/1 9/1 2003-04 Annual FTE 1289.3 683.2 323.6 193.9 270.7 178.8 316.6 135.6 102.8 2003-04 Budgeted Instructional Faculty 29.00 23.67 18.00 15.17 17.5 15.67 14 12 13 2003-04 Student Faculty Ratios 44/1 29/1 18/1 13/1 15/1 11/1 23/1 11/1 8/1 2004-05 Annual FTE 1458.0 741.1 393.5 208.8 282.8 158.6 281.6 130.4 124.5 2004-05 Budgeted Instructional Faculty 2004-05 Student Faculty Ratios 2005-06 Annual FTE 1310.5 849 380 234 280.7 187.7 222.1 126.7 137.5 2005-06 Budgeted Instructional Faculty 30.17 25.34 18.67 16.67 17.5 17 14 13 14 2005-06 Student Faculty Ratios 43/1 34/1 20/1 14/1 16/1 11/1 16/1 10/1 10/1 2006-07 Annual FTE 1003.4 878.7 387.1 209.0 273.5 14.3 161.8 180.6 128.5 2006-07 Budgeted Instructional Faculty 2006-07 Student Faculty Ratios 2007-08 Annual FTE 1030.4/704.8 856/ 799.7 401.7/399.8 225.2/227.6 282.8/ 283 181.9/155 164.9/159 132.2/122.5 160.1/133.1 2007-08 Budgeted Instructional Faculty 2007-08 Student Faculty Ratios 2008-09 Annual FTE 2008-09 Budgeted Instructional Faculty 2008-09 Student Faculty Ratios

  15. Math 95, 96, 120, 124, 126, 127, 128, 132 • A quick glance gives the appearance that so far we did well wrt the current draft of projected cuts. • Ignores DMS short faculty lines, while some have significantly more per FTE. • No one wants from COS wants anyone in COS to lose their job. • Also do not want to become this year’s “firemen” (after all, look at Philosophy). • Until needed faculty lines are provided, some band aids are needed wrt to these courses, e.g. the GAs need faculty class models from which to copy • Dr. Verma teaching Math 126 with breakouts sessions, each with a different GA. Then the GA creates similar tests for his own class. • Moving faculty to these courses leaves Math 181 students without instructors. • Dr. Verma supervises common collective grading following the Dept. Finals. • Even so, some GAs create problems by giving too easy tests, inflating test grades, inflating the final overall grade, etc., etc. • Besides “faculty models” from which to copy, final overall grades need to be reviewed (some of which Drs. Ananda and Verma already do) • Tests need to be reviewed to verify appropriate level of difficulty.

  16. Math 95, 96, 120, 124, 126, 127, 128, 132 • Significant problem in that these affect so many students, • President is interested. I suspect the Vice Chancellor is also interested. • 2,640 in fall 2010 and 2,033 in spring 2011 in the red courses • 851 in Math 126 and 635 in Math 132 during fall/spring • How many individual GeoSciences faculty are involved with service that affects over 1400 students annually and a number of graduate assistants? • Over 1,200 students in Math 95/96 per semester. • Dan Asera has helped to provide communication on a number of issues to the Math 95/96 instructors. • I have asked Asera to submit a proposal to Dr. Ananda and me concerning our hiring him during SS 2/3 to assist Dr. Ananda in keeping/developing rigor in the Math 95/96 sections taught by GAs. • No watered down tests, final, etc. • Pilot attempt to be expanded during fall 2011 to additional courses. • Reminder: many other things are in place/being done (e.g. MOU which outlines everything that has been developed during the past several years).

  17. Possibly colleges may merge. • We may want to think about being strategic about this for the distant future. • In particular, when thinking about an eventual new building. • We may be able to be first on a university list, but will likely be second on any COS list. • The lab sciences will insist that new labs are needed. • Even if the long ago proposed Lab/DMS building had funding, it would likely be in two phases with the labs as phase 1. • Dean Yasbin seemed to hope for initial financing of $80 million, which eventually seemed only enough for a first phase. • Fine Arts has English, who has a large number of service courses (though not the variety—no Math 95,96,120,124, 126, 127, 132, 181, 182). • Has small class enrollments in ENG ???. • Has a director of Composition. • But possibly (don’t know) low salaries, high teaching loads. • The President mentioned COS with the College of Business, which includes Economics. • COS used to be with Engineering.

  18. SKIP • Donations committee needed? • Add Advisory may consider process in fall 2011 for spring 2012 about untenured faculty.

  19. DMS Hour Meeting with the Dean next week at 11-noon On the issue of the meetings we are trying to arrange with the Departments, the purpose is slightly different from previous discussions. Here, we would like to receive comments or ideas from interested faculty on the process itself, i.e., what would you do if you needed to cut 1.35 million from CoS? How would you consider the strategic mission of the College? Would you cut vertically, horizontally or other? Would you preserve research, teaching, or advising? What are the important factors to consider in making cuts? Anything else? We are arranging similar meetings within the College with our faculty senators, and with student leaders. We may also meet with certain faculty committees, such as the P&T committee. Of course, we can also discuss the present budget cuts if desired. Thanks, Tim. Timothy L. Porter • Please start to think abut this meeting. • How would you prioritize? • How do decisions that essentially shut down the university weigh into this?

  20. Which groups of service courses do you protect, if any? Which students does DMS turn away? • We have a number of non-100 level service courses (Math 251, 314, 351, 365, 431, 432, etc. Stat 391, 463, etc.) • The enrollment in these is small (certainly less than 500 students) and they serve a minimal number of departments (though ones we consider important). • These use actual DMS faculty and like most non 100-level classes are expensive. • Are these on the table to not offer with any DMS faculty reduction? • What about calculus, which also primarily uses DMS faculty? • When we “change” a faculty assignment, the end result is not being able to cover Math 181. Do we consider turning away a few hundred Math 181 students? • What about the “main” general core math courses:120, 124, 126, 127, 128, 132? • Without the students from these courses and Math 95/96, UNLV shuts down. • Around 24% are at Math 95/96 level? • About 44% are at the Math 120, 124, 126, 127, 128, 132 range? • Faculty are needed for the GAs to model their courses/exams/grading from. • Do we just stop offering these, with the university closing its doors? • What about not offering graduate courses and thesis, essentially killing our graduate programs? • Then with the loss of the GAs, the faculty could cover Math 120, 122, 123, 124, 126, 127, 128, 132 by each teaching an additional 90 students per semester.

  21. Think about (prepare?) next week’s meeting with the Dean • Should the core be protected, and if so, at what level of priority? • Grants vs. FTEs: under half of grants go to the system and the university, whereas… • No FTEs, then no faculty, then no grants • Luxury/waste: both summer and also small departments having own administration and staff). • Geo has three Administrative Assistants • Are they employed during summer; are they earning their summer paychecks? • GEOG 2010 summer classes: 93 students at 100-level, 2 at 400-level, and 26 at 700-level. • No endless updating the three summer schedules, the instructor assignments, the room assignments, etc. etc. according to the enrollment • Minimal complaints for the Associate Chair to handle. • Minimal prerequisite checking • No working with SOARS on weekly basis (ask Pat how many) • No endless number of contracts to produce • In comparison, DMS teaches approximately 2,400 summer students. More than a typical high school but only has mainly four people working on the above items. • Does any of our faculty have any comparison information concerning high schools?

  22. Think about next week’s meeting • There are a lot of A contracts. • Better use of existing resources: • FTEs/faculty (are 3 and 4 nonintuitive and need to be constantly pointed out?) • If you increase faculty lines in a department that with adequate faculty lines, then typically the ratio goes down. • If you increase faculty lines in a department that is extremely short faculty resources, then the ratio goes up since more faculty end up teaching the high enrollment 100-level courses. • If you cut a few faculty lines from a department with an adequate number of faculty lines, typically the FTEs/faculty go up (since the other faculty can absorb the loss). • If you decrease faculty lines in a department that is extremely short faculty lines, then the ratio goes down since the faculty emphasis needs to be on the higher level courses (which typically have lower enrollments than 100-level courses). • Dean/Provost Alden: Faculty lines were given for new program development, instead of for covering the student enrollment. In fact, a large number of lecturers (teaching 12 credits per semester were let go from our department, and we continue to have problems in Math 120 through 132)—partially preceding Alden.

  23. Meeting Agenda 1. Call to Order 2. Announcements 3. Approval of Friday April 1, 2011 Departmental Meeting Minutes 4. Committee Reports 5. Proposal 1 Bylaws change (Change 3.4 and 3.5 as shown in the attachment) 6. Proposal #2 Bylaws change (Change 4.3.1 as shown in the attachment) 7. Proposal #3 Bylaws change (Change 4.3.2 as shown in the attachment) 8. Proposal #4 Bylaws change (Change 6.3.6 as shown in the attachment) 9. Proposal #5 Bylaws change (Make the rest of the changes in 6.3, as shown in the attachment) 10. Proposal #6 Bylaws change (Change Appendix C.2.d as shown in the attachment) 11. New Business 12. Adjournment

More Related