The Moon Room

A Community Forum on Guilford College Faculty Life

Open discussion area for faculty meeting on May 3, 2017

May 3rd, 2017

Please feel free to comment on any aspect of the May 3rd faculty meeting or on other topics. You may post anonymously if you wish.


Comment cards left at the meeting:

How many would stand in opposition today if we approved LAGER 4.5 + global engagement course?


The fact that we’re not talking about enrollment is not evidence of faculty’s lack of concern or care re: enrollment… The comment in the survey that students don’t want/parents don’t pay for social justice education seems a perfect example of why gen ed revision conversations haven’t explicitly made these connections. It seems our focus has been on what’s necessary educationally speaking, even when it comes to things they don’t already know are necessary.


Re: “outside the classroom” faux-disagreement… I think there may be some slippery vocab at the heart of this. Even just now as Jane spoke about Art and Science recommendations, she sometimes said “beyond campus,” sometimes said, “beyond classroom.” This difference is huge. I’m grateful to both President and Clerk for helping clear this up.



Excerpt from Faculty Handbook, Section 1.305, Faculty Meetings

May 3rd, 2017

Excerpt From Guilford’s Faculty Handbook, Section 1.305, Faculty Meetings

Faculty meetings are conducted according to Quaker business procedures. Meetings begin with silence in order to reach beneath individual preferences to a level of openness that will facilitate decision-making for the good of the whole and end in silence to affirm the unity of the whole. The gathering of a sense of the meeting normally involves two stages: a tentative exploration of the issue, raising questions of clarification and criticism, and a convergence toward decision, presenting considered judgments. As the tide builds, members add “I agree” or “I approve of that” in order to assist the Clerk in sensing how far the group has moved toward unity and to avoid repeating the same point just said by another.

In the process of reaching decisions, faculty members have the responsibility to share their concerns with their colleagues, to listen carefully to the views of others, and to be willing to lay aside personal or group interest in order to allow a harmonious sense of the meeting to emerge. It is crucial that objections be raised in a timely, respectful, and direct manner during the meeting. Decisions rest upon a general sense of the meeting. The sense of the meeting is not identical to unanimity, but implies a willingness of the group to go forward with the proposal. If a faculty member does not agree with the sense of the meeting, he or she may

  1. “Stand aside” and allow the decision to proceed while not actually endorsing the action or policy,
  2. Ask to be recorded as opposed but allow the group to go forward, or
  3. Choose to delay the group’s decision when the issue is a matter of deep personal conscience.

In the latter case, the Clerk will normally ask for further discussion or propose that a committee work with the dissenting member(s) to understand better the roots of the objection and continue discussion of the issue at another faculty meeting. The faculty may move forward despite an individual’s objections if the Clerk senses that his or her concerns are not rooted in the best tradition of Friends’ practice or do not spring from deep conscience.

Clerk’s Committee Agenda for May 3, 2017

May 3rd, 2017

Clerk’s Committee Meeting Agenda

Thursday May 3, 2017 2:30 pm

  1. Gathering and Moment of Silence 2 minutes
  2. Figuring out who’s doing the minutes [Sherry?] 1 minute
  3. Approval of Minutes from April 27 meeting2 minutes
  4. Review of faculty meeting May 3
  5. For discussion: General education and Art and Science next steps 30 minutes
  6. For discussion: Renaming of departments and majors 10 minutes
  7. For discussion: Remaining business for 2016-17, plans for 2017-18 10 minutes


Topics for upcoming meetings –

  • Jane – VP salary information


Clerk’s Committee Minutes for April 20th, 2017

May 1st, 2017

Clerk’s Committee Meeting Agenda

Thursday April 20, 2017 2:30 pm

Present: Beth Rushing, Sherry Giles, Don Smith, Gwen Erickson, Eva Lawrence, Dave Dobson (Clerk), Alfonso Abad Mancheño (Minute-taker).

  1.    Gathering and Moment of Silence                                                                       2 minutes
  2. Figuring out who’s doing the minutes [Alfonso Abad Mancheño]                         1 minute
  3.    Approval of Minutes from April 13 meeting. Minutes were approved.                2 minutes
  4.    Proposal to reduce GPA for academic probation for newer students.              10 minutes

Last minute petition to consider by Clerk’s Committee. The change might help students who had a bad first semester. Should we move it forward for next semester?, if we adopt it in April, it will benefit students in the Fall. We decided to move forward. Clerk’s will ask Barb to write a proposal. If it is ready, we will move it forward for faculty approval on Wednesday, April 26, 2017.

  1.    Review of faculty forum April 19                                                                        10 minutes

We discussed some of the comments and proposals about sending people away during an immersive experience, and other comments about the CIPs, (if they are experiential, they are not so different from our minors now). In general we discussed that there was a better reception of the new version, but it seems to be better structured. We commented that CPs now have to be at the beginning or the end, with a big gap in the middle. For a sense of continuity we need to figure out a more organic transition of the CPs.

After the forum some faculty members raised concerns. There seems to be a big gap between divisions and do we need to move towards a more cohesive curriculum? How would that affect enrollment?

  1.    For discussion: General Education Revision                                                    40 minutes

We looked at the new suggestions in the curriculum revision proposal.

Removing off campus requirements: People seem to agree in taking that requirement away. Lager pointed out that Arts and Sciences want that requirement. It is not clear that Arts and Sciences recommended that, it does not have to be off-campus. We commented that it should be there as an option.

Tim Kircher’s suggestions were well received and they would preserve the requirement for historical approaches or understanding.

We need to rename: CIPs, gateways and its parts, new suggestions for overall framing. The term immersive was ok, breadth is not appealing. We will ask for help from marketing.

Michael Dutch’s suggestion about immersives: required but editing the description, a note accompanying approval, or deciding what complete means, in a way that does not conflict with work or family, or trivialize the experience. Edit: required to engage with, but with a note explaining Michael’s concern.

The change from C- to D-. We considered piecing it out, for instance, C- for writing and D- for FL or other requirements. Now the requirement is D- except when it is for the major. There are concerns, we feel comfortable with a D- but we will let the faculty decide in this particular item.

Add an additional course with an explicit focus outside the U.S. in the Gateway Global Engagement section: This is going to be discussed this Summer, what the content is. Strong content would be forwarded to the group dealing with that, and that is part of a whole critical perspective. How does global perspective fit with critical perspectives?

In order not to add a new class in the curriculum, we need to be intentional to synchronize CP and global perspectives so that we do not put more requirements in the curriculum. We agreed that María’s suggestions should be addressed, but we feel that the proper home is critical perspectives, not an additional requirement. The door is wide open to courses of global issues in other parts of the curriculum, and it should be encouraged.

  1.    Agenda for faculty meeting April 26                                                                  10 minutes

Topics for upcoming faculty meetings –

  •     Gen Ed revision
  •     Public Health proposal
  •     Jane – VP salary information
  •     Proposal to reduce GPA for academic probation for newer students

Remaining Wednesday Dates:

April 26 – Faculty Meeting
May 3 – Reserved for Faculty Meeting
May 10 – Reading Day

The Moon Room

A Community Forum on Guilford College Faculty Life