Governance Retreat Planning Committee Meeting

21 May, 2009    1:30-3:00 p.m. Kilpatrick Glass Rm.

 

Present:                        Digiovanni, Farr, Kleine, Turner 

Regrets:            Davis-Bray, Prock                    

Absent              Culpa-Bondal, Christenson

 

Agenda:

1)                  Review work from last time and report any progress

a.       57 will attend—will check on inviting VP’s

b.       3 scenarios for mock steering prepared

2)                  Continue planning beginning with 2 p.m. (see below)

3)                  Assign additional tasks and determine time by which to be completed

a.      Catering/food/door prizes (have $1500—see Monica Starley—President can’t have gluten; others have other dietary needs; possible door prizes AAUP Red Book, Einstein gift card, Follett’s book store card) klmk (Alison, would you like this responsibility?  Let me know.)

b.       West Campus Center Facility—making sure we can get in when needed, enough seating (Flor, would you like this responsibility?  Let me know.)

c.       Double check parts others are performing and ensure they are on-board Turner

d.       Supporting collegiality at lunch Digiovanni  

 

Next Meeting: 29 June at 10 a.m. at Blackbird!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tentative Schedule for Governance Retreat

9 a.m. – 5 p.m. for 12 August, 2009

Theme: Engagement and Empowerment through the Governing Concepts

 

8:30 – 9:00 Check-in and Light Refreshments

 

9:00 - 9:05 Welcome-- President Leland

 

9:05-9:15 Get to Know You Icebreaker (Larry, please plan something fun & easy that will help senators learn new faces and names and plan to implement at the retreat)


9:15 - 10:15 Orientation/GC Investment in Shared Governance (Rotation of six people [5 chairs and History Overview] -- each stop 7-8 minutes)
Each standing committee (S.C.) will be grouped together and interact with chairs of last year’s committees (excepting ECUS) in a rotating fashion for about 7-8 minutes to learn of and ask/respond to questions about the work of the S.C., especially as to how it intersects with that certain S.Cs.  Chairs (or their designee) will rotate from committee to committee while committee members remain together as a group.  One additional “chair” role will be filled by Craig Turner who will provide the Senate overview and orientation.  Then all S.C.s will come together to hear from ECUS to learn of its work and how items are steered to particular committees. 

 

10:15 – 10:45 Application/ GC Shared Sense of Purpose Attendees will regroup themselves and work in 6 small groups of people nearby them to “mock” steer a senate issue to its proper committee and report out. (Nancy, please create 3 additional different mock issues for steering and four copies of each issue to be distributed as well as be responsible for implementing this portion at the retreat)

 

10:45 – 11:00   Break with snacks and drinks/ GC Positive Motivators

 

11:00 -11:40 Robert's Rules/ GC Transparent Decision Making  Introduction of usefulness of Robert’s Rules by long-time parliamentarian, Ken Farr. (10 mins.)  In newly re-mixed clusters of new and veteran senators (made by us), small groups of 6-7 people will be asked to review and discuss the Robert’s Rules “Cheat Sheet”, determine 3-4 items whose use would really benefit a “sticky” meeting, and draft a Robert’s Rules “Cheat Sheet”—Cliff Notes version. (10-15 mins.) These will be presented to the large group with suggestions as to what should be followed in the 2009-10 University Senate meetings. (15-20 mins.) Note: Need to ensure that the shaded rules on the current “Cheat Sheet” have highlighting removed. (Ken, this is your responsibility to plan and implement)

 

11:40 - 12:00  Application of Robert’s Rules/ GC Transparent Decision Making 

GRPC members will role play parts of cases/scenarios that Ken Farr develops. Participants will then be asked to use the Roberts Rules and work with a partner to determine whether the case was enacted appropriately or not. Participants will be asked to volunteer answers and provide rationale.  This will lead into a guided discussion of the nature of the senate meetings. (Ken, this is your responsibility to plan and implement)

 

12:00-12:45  Nature of Senate Meetings Guided Discussion/ GCs Investment in Shared Governance and Positive Motivators

Typical Senate meeting will be described and Presiding Officer request that the session to be used to provide direction for the upcoming year.  In small groups of about 7 plus a facilitator guided by Ken Farr, Craig Turner, Mike Rose, Karynne Kleine, Tanya Goette, Ken McGill, and Lee Digiovanni participants will asked to consider the ways that Senate meetings might be redesigned to foster engagement and empowerment.  The groups will also be asked to prioritize their recommendations (20 mins.).  A scribe will ask for 1 idea per group of prioritized ideas until all are recorded.  Then by use of an “applaus-o-meter” the strength of each idea will be garnered.  Ideas with a great deal of support will be considered to redesign how University Senate meetings are conducted. (25 mins.) (Craig, please ask Ken McGill to be the applause-o-meter and if possible provide an actual sound probe.)

 

12:45 - 2:00 Social and Lunch/ GC Positive Motivators
Food, games, diversions, get-to-know-you, supporting collegiality activities (Lee, please plan and implement all non-food aspects of this.)

 

2:00 - 2:45 Best Thinking on Mentoring Leaders and PR for University Senate/ Gcs Collegial Leadership,  Adequate Resources, and Shared Information

Participants will be asked to consider concerns with sustainability of the University Senate, specifically developing leaders for and engagement in University Senate.  Table tent cards with one of six following issues will be distributed and participants asked to gather themselves at site of the issue that most interests them.  Participants appoint a reporter and a recorder and discuss the advantages and disadvantages to the suggested approach to the issue (of mentoring future leaders and PR for the Senate).  They may also contribute additional recommendations if they have time/inclination to discuss.  Issues are 1) standing committees have chair designates in order to groom leadership for the upcoming year, 2) the university contributes funding and develops a defined program for “future leaders”, 3) junior and senior senators are “partnered” in order to create a mentoring relationship, 4) incentives for serving on the University Senate; 5) promote Senators making efforts and taking responsibilities individually, 6) communication means/tools, especially those that have not been tried to date. (15 min.)  Reporters will share w/ large group and written documents collected.  (Karynne, please plan and implement this.)


2:45 - 3:00 Break—drinks no snacks

3:00 - 3:30 Connections between University Mission and University Senate/ GCs Adequate Resources and Transparent Decision Making
By committee participants will be asked to identify what they perceive as the relationship between the University Senate and the University Mission, whether such a relationship ought to exist, and discuss ways and means for promoting such a relationship (if they think it should exist).  The committee will then create a Venn diagram or other graphic organizer to represent their thinking and post on a wall. (Lee, please plan and implement this.)

 

3:30 - 4:00 Lessons Learned/Commitments to Shared Governance for 2009-10/ GCs Investment in Shared Governance and Shared Sense of Purpose  
On small slips of paper participants will write an “aha” moment or lesson learned from the day that will be collected for entry into door prize drawing.  There will also be a banner for participants to write one commitment they will carry out in the upcoming year.  This will be displayed at monthly University Senate meetings. (Karynne, please plan and implement this.)


4:00 - 4:15 Evaluations and other winding down kinda things(Flor and Craig, would you like to be responsible for planning and implementing this portion at the retreat?)


4:15 Party Hearty! with food & beverages

 

Nancy’s Scenarios

1.       The Board of Regents has a new academic advising initiative. (provide short copy of initiative?) How will GCSU respond?     ECUS will steer the initiative requirements to _______________

In reality, ECUS sent the initiative to APC as the lead committee. APC coordinated with SAPC and FAPC.

 

2.       Benefits for domestic partners.   Such as sick leave.    ECUS will steer the request to ___________________________

In reality ECUS sent 2 domestic partnership benefit requests to RPIPC

 

3. Advising Policy.  APC proposes a motion to University Senate:  “Advising sessions are required for incoming first-year students and new transfer student. In addition, academic advisors and students shall meet to review the student’s degree progress by the completion of 30, 60, and 90 earned credit hours.”

 

4. The BOR recommends an Intellectual Property Policy for each USG institution.  ECUS would steer this initiative to which committee?

(RPIPC)

 

“The purpose of this Intellectual Property Policy is to encourage and recognize research and innovation by members of the University Community, clarify ownership of intellectual property rights, create opportunities for public use of University innovations, and provide for the sharing of revenue with the creators of intellectual property.”

5. GCSU needs a scholarly misconduct policy.  ECUS would steer this to _____________                                    (RPIPC)

“Georgia College & State University (GCSU) does not condone and will not tolerate any act of misconduct in scholarly activity by any member of the university community. Violation of this policy is grounds for administrative sanction. The University strives to ensure that all members of its community understand and uphold this policy.”

 

6. The International Education Committee has presented a plan to internationalize the curriculum at GCSU.  ECUS would steer this to ____________    (CAPC as the lead committee.  It was sent to FAPC to consider adding to the IFR)