GUESTS:   Brian Casey, Thomas Doeppner, Nancy Dunbar, Mary Fennell, Kenneth Miller, Robert Pelcovits, Amy Remensnyder, Massimo Riva, Karen Sibley, John Tomasi, Terry Tullis

Professor Valente opened the meeting at 3:05 p.m. and invited Dean Nancy Dunbar to discuss with the FEC the annual report from the College Curriculum Council (CCC). He noted that the CCC Executive Committee has been operating with additional members for quite some time. Is there a need to change the Faculty Rules to reflect the expanded membership? Dean Dunbar is not inclined to change the Rules because the CCC Executive Committee does not take upon itself the decision-making role but rather makes reco mmendations to the full CCC. Instead, she proposes that the Dean of the College be allowed some flexibility on how the CCC Executive Committee should be set up, and the FEC concurred. At today's CCC meeting, they will be finalizing their subcommittees t hat will be stretched very thin where faculty members are concerned. It would be beneficial once the new Dean of the College appointment is official to consider expanding faculty membership on the CCC. Also at this afternoon's meeting, they will be disc ussing ways in which teaching assistants are used and their importance to a number of departments. Some concern was voiced about Brown's difficulties in being able to assess how well its students are learning. How does one go about assessing things that are intangible? Lengthy discussion ensued with regard to new concentrations, independent studies, cluster reviews, and the Visiting Diversity Committee Report. The FEC suggested some minor revisions to the written report after which Professor Valente th anked her for coming.

Professors John Tomasi, Kenneth Miller, and Massimo Riva were invited to speak about their experiences with the Global Education Network (GEN). Each individual spoke about his personal contact with GEN and all had a positive view on the product. They co nsidered the GEN people to be professional beginners who were very pleasant, flexible and receptive to their ideas and comments. Professors Tomasi, Miller, and Riva raised interesting questions as did the FEC. If Brown is to be involved with GEN, should Brown be rethinking its Mission Statement? It was mentioned that the marketing issue will have much to do with its mission or core, and techniques applied by GEN will be important. How much control will faculty have over their course once GEN has it in their hands and what happens to the course if the professor leaves the University? What happens to research and service to the University if many of the faculty become involved with GEN? Initiatives and policies with regard to distance learning were di scussed and Brian Casey, Executive Officer to the Provost, spoke about interactive technology vs. the textbook. Does Brown want to be so close to GEN that we are at the table all the time or does Brown want to say they will have just a few professors inv olved? Courses appear to be the issue here and not the professors. Lengthy discussion ensued whereby the FEC will consider a faculty forum on the subject.

Professor Valente invited Professor Robert Pelcovits and Dean Karen Sibley to discuss the annual report from the Advisory Committee on Summer Studies. There is concern that the number of students enrolled in the Program declined last summer. This could be contributed to a strong economy drawing students away to internships and other jobs or to a new financial aid policy which states that in order to receive a federal loan, a student must be enrolled in two summer courses. The number of courses being of fered may also have been a factor. The Summer Studies budget has provided strong monetary components to the financial aid package, and they hope this will help to increase the enrollment numbers. They are pleased that the percentage of non-Brown undergr aduates enrolled in the Summer Session has consistently increased over the past five years due largely to aggressive advertising. Professor Pelcovits voiced concern that there is no mechanism for rewarding departments that support the summer school. Dep artments who devote resources to the summer school lose enrollments during the academic year that could possibly affect the department profile at Chairs meetings with the Administration. Also, it could potentially affect the number of TAs given to the de partment. The FEC's help in bringing this concern to the Administration's attention would be greatly appreciated. There was some discussion about the possibility of staggering the starting dates of the summer session which would allow students more time to take two courses which would mean overlapping with the regular academic year. This could prove to be very successful with premed students. Professor Valente thanked Professor Pelcovits and Dean Sibley for their report.

The Chair then asked the FEC if there were any additions or corrections to the 9/12/00 minutes. In the second paragraph, fifth sentence from the bottom, change "It is important that faculty members" to "It is important that administrators". In the same paragraph, second sentence from the bottom, change "Sweatshop Committee" to "The President's Code of Conduct Advisory Committee". It was also suggested to add to the second page, middle paragraph, fourth sentence, "University Librarian" next to Merrily T aylor's name. A motion was made, seconded and passed to accept the minutes as amended.

Discussion on the Global Education Network continued with Professor Amy Remensnyder who shared some negative aspects of her experience with GEN. She went relatively far into the negotiation process with GEN before deciding she did not want to participate and commented that the GEN people were very friendly and cooperative. She feels that although on-line learning is the upcoming thing and is inevitable, getting involved with GEN does not seem to her to be the best way to go for several reasons. Audienc e was an issue and the fact that GEN is hoping to eventually be able to offer course credit for these classes toward a GEN degree. What kind of credit will be offered and from what institution? Could a GEN degree cheapen the value of a Brown Degree? Th ere was no mission statement and the vision seemed to be a GEN degree. There is a problem of technology, and the way the program is presented is somewhat crude. It seems there is nothing to gain pedagogically because standing in a room alone to teach a class is not a challenge when there is no contact with students. Professor Remensnyder concluded her presentation by stating that she supports on-line learning through community outreach where Brown would have complete control. After a question and ans wer period, Professor Valente thanked Professor Remensnyder for sharing her views with the FEC.

Professor Terry Tullis asked if the GEN issue would be coming before the Faculty Advisory Committee on Computers which he now chairs. Professor Valente responded that the FEC would discuss this in Executive Session and he will be in touch with him.

The meeting was called to Executive Session at 5:05 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Cheryl A. Moreau
Secretary