Rollins College: Rollins Scholarship Online (RSO)

Diversity Council,

Rollins College 
Rollins Scholarship Online 
Diversity Council All College Committees and Initiatives 
2-1-2022 
Minutes, Diversity Council Meeting, Tuesday, February 1, 2022 
Diversity Council 
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.rollins.edu/diversity_council 
Diversity Council Meeting Minutes – 2/1/2022 
In attendance: Zeynep Teymuroglu, Sarah Laake, Jenifer Ruby, Katie Alonso, Vidhu Aggarwal, 
Josh Savala 
I. Budget and Council Management: 
Zeynep: I found out last week that we cannot postpone our payments – $1,438 (?)– cannot 
pay from next years budget because no roll overs in accounts. Have meeting with Jenny. We 
were given extra president diversity awards because didn’t know there was a cash prize with 
it. 
Robin’s project will be in June – will happen next year.  
Roughly $9000/$8000 in annual budget. Once she meets with Jenny she will let us know. 
Would another department cover that deficit? Hoping Dean or Provost’s office will cover it.  
Jenifer: Grant needs to be apprised of the situation – what happened, what we spent money 
on, how this occurred – did we have the money in the budget in spring 2020 to have covered 
those, and they just didn’t get requested? And it got swept? Or….?  
We believe this is most likely what happened – not the fault of those who applied, who 
managed it, etc.. 
Jenifer: Ultimately, we don’t know who was apprised of the situation, but this is what it is, if 
Grant agrees he can just balance it out. Explain that all of the money went to recognizing 
faculty staff and students – went to one each, but previous years did just one of these. 
Confusion about rollover and that this issue was just handed to this new team. Best to just say 
this is the recollection of what happened, if you need more than that we can dig deeper.  
This year no awards will be given – we just covered what happened before this year began. 
Previous years voted on what to spend on but didn’t discuss how to manage it 
Jenifer: Need to do: create a SharePoint drive that everyone in council has access to, so that 
if we end up having to show and document, we have a single place where all the meeting 
minutes are. Everyone keeps them in different places – sometimes they end up on the 
website, sometimes not. As Budget Manager, if we don’t have access to past budgets that 
should be fixed. There isn’t a guide as a council as to how the group works, what the 
succession plan is…this we could do by forming a single place. 
Vidhu: Feels like redundancy, as a group, lots of lost knowledge. It feels like we should 
focus on how to move forward given the limitations we have and not having a budget. 
Jenifer: Part of the challenge has been that we don’t have access to something we might 
need. Could at least start dumping some documents from past things into a single folder. This 
would need to include the structure for the group – how does a payment get made, what is the 
structure for those, what each position does, etc. 
Josh: Maybe in April/May we can truly look to see what we’ll have to do for next year. 
Zeynep: Come June we’ll have $9,000 minus 180 and 190. 
Jenifer: I’m willing to step in as chair for the duration of the semester. Then we’ll do 
campaigning to find someone new – this might be helpful to have one person (faculty leader) 
who is in for two years and has overlap with the new staff leader. 
Sarah/Jenifer: Very possible the budget shortage came from the taxes on the awards given – 
Sarah recalls the taxes were somewhere between $300-$500 each, so with all the awards 
given out that would about add up to the deficit. 
II. Grant Applications: 
Zeynep: Additionally, some said our grant guidelines are not clear and it doesn’t explicitly 
say it requires student participation. They said it wasn’t clear (though it may seem clear to 
us), but we should review the application – probably good to do just because it’s been awhile. 
Jenifer: It might also make it easier for the committee if a rubric was developed, because 
many people come at it from different angles.  
Zeynep: Eric Small has a rubric – going to ask if he can share it with us. 
Sarah: Stephanie Kincaid might also have made one – at least a list of questions that we 
were checking off as we go. Maybe we could ask her as well if she has anything. 
Jenifer will lead the charge of pulling together documentation for history. 
Grant applications will start to come in for the next year. Both Josh and Vidhu agreed to help 
with reviewing new applications. 
III. Plans for Next Year (Academic Year 2022-2023):  
What should we do next year, aside from just grant reviewing – what are our goals? 
- We talked about how we should have a session in the faculty scholarship day on 
diversity, maybe we wanted to have our own mini conference on diversity – reached out 
to Jenny about that and she said it was an excellent idea.  
o If wanted to organize this, we could plan a day for this in the fall (separate from 
faculty scholarship day) and have a roundtable discussion about how we can 
promote diversity.  
o The idea is to have a lot of participation from many different groups – student 
presenters, faculty, etc. 
o If we did something like this we’d need to team up with other folks on campus 
o Would need to get commitment from others around campus– talking within 
structure with faculty – to get institutional support and encouragement – Diversity 
Council sponsoring this but would need to be collaboration. 
▪ Most likely would need some higher-level folks speaking to this (Grant or 
Susan) 
o Probably wouldn’t give funds to people presenting who work here, but maybe for 
honorariums coming to speak on campus. 
o The grant diversity awards went up significantly, maybe we can look back to see 
if we scale those awards back and use those funds toward hosting people. 
o People who have received these infusion grants – want them to be keynote 
speakers for these grants—here is an opportunity for you to present some of what 
you’re doing 
o The Summit – the theme/focus has shifted – most recent was on 
Diversity/Immigration. Will ask to see what we did previously – worked as good 
community building thing on campus.  
o Day of Scholarship/whatever we call it – something where there is a participatory 
element that people can get together ; we could advertise it this term so that as 
folks start doing work over the summer they can start thinking forward on the 
event on the fall. This might be good for summer faculty collaboration work. 
o Could have it on a Friday afternoon or something, when there are less classes, so 
more people could participate. Should be held at a time when students can come – 
staff and students should be invited – all can learn, know what others are working 
on. Faculty-staff-undergraduate presentations. Have that exchange, have people 
get excited about it. 
o Vidhu: One of the things that I knew with these students – did a manifesto in her 
class, the students really liked it so they decided to do a workshop with other 
people on campus ot make their own manifestos of what they want to happen on 
campus. They were all excited and proud about it and they demonstrated that – 
turned out to be a cool event. Gives everyone an opportunity to feel like we’re the 
experts on something. 
o Jenifer: If we had something like this, might be a way to encourage people to 
think about what they can do for the grants, what these grants mean, all of that – 
one of the things that Megan was talking about is that people don’t know what we 
do, don’t know what this is, so just having a website isn’t enough. So between this 
kind of event plus the grants it’ll be a good way to contribute to the community. 
We do x, y, z – makes it an easy tell. Plus it makes the grants more visible. 
o There used to be presentations if they got the grant so they can share what they 
got the award for. Not sure if it was COVID or the budget or what – no clue why 
it got cut. Jenifer thinks it’s mainly because there isn’t recorded memory of what 
they do. 
- Other ways to engage with community: 
o Lucy Cross Center – their input was very valuable when first started working in 
social justice work. Wonder if they’re still active. Currently no faculty person 
there – there were two course releases and a stipend associated with it but that 
went away so it just got melded into CICI, so the person just had to do the work 
on top of regular role. 
▪ Talk to Sam Vega – she is the one currently running it. They have space 
and opportunity – people still gather as part of Lucy Cross Center – they 
do different lunch and learn events (women of color roundtable events, 
monthly faculty/staff conversations – general topic to talk about, etc.). 
Once a month can we have a diversity council something tie in with them. 
Let people know it’s an open invitation – not just council members can 
come to these meetings. 
NEXT MEETING PLANS: 
- Discuss how bias incidents are handled on campus 
- Consider ways we can go back to the way Diversity Council used to operate, where it 
served as a place where people can have discussions about incidents happening in their 
community – faculty, students 
ACTION STEPS: 
- Zeynep will speak to Grant about the budget deficit 
- Zeynep will share the current member list so that Jenifer can go through and adjust the 
list-serv 
- Jenifer will begin to compile historical knowledge about the committee (meeting minutes, 
activities/events, budgets) 


English

Minutes, Diversity Council Meeting, Tuesday, February 1, 2022

College of Liberal Arts Faculty, Rollins College

Minutes, College of Liberal Arts Faculty Meeting, Thursday, April 14, 2022

College of Liberal Arts Executive Committe,

Rollins College 
Rollins Scholarship Online 
Executive Committee Minutes College of Liberal Arts Minutes and Reports 
4-7-2022 
Minutes, Executive Committee Meeting, Thursday, April 7, 2022 
College of Liberal Arts Executive Committe 
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.rollins.edu/as_ec 
 
 
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING 
 
April 7, 2022 
Agenda 
 
12:30 p.m. in Orlando 105 
 
I. Approval of March 24, 2022 Minutes 
 
II. FRDC Proposed Bylaw Revisions 
 
III. Proposal for Standardized PTR Process 
 
IV. Proposal for Revised Midcourse, Tenure, and Promotion Review Process 
 
V. Set April 14 CLA Faculty Meeting Agenda 
  
 
 
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING 
April 7, 2022 
Minutes 
 
PRESENT 
Missy Barnes, Jennifer Cavenaugh, Grant Cornwell, Hannah Ewing, Jill Jones, Ashley Kistler, 
Karla Knight, Richard Lewin, Julia Maskivker, Jana Mathews, Dan Myers, Jamey Ray, Rob 
Sanders, Susan Singer, Anne Stone 
 
Excused: Jennifer Cavenaugh, Grant Cornwell, Rob Sanders, Susan Singer 
 
Guests: Sendy Sejourne, Kara Wright, Eric Smaw 
 
 
CALL TO ORDER 
Jana Mathews called the meeting to order at 12:30 P.M. 
 
 
APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM March 24, 2022, EC MEETING 
Jones made a motion to approve the minutes from the March 24, 2022, EC Meeting. Ewing 
seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. 
 
 
BUSINESS 
 
FRDC Proposed Bylaw Revisions 
ATTACHMENT #1 
Eric Smaw 
This year FRDC reviewed Bylaws for consistency and to explicitly state the parameters of FRDC. 
They recommend all grants and awards specific to CLA faculty be reviewed by FRDC. This would 
ensure divisional representation during the review process, something the awards don’t 
currently have. Additionally, this move would provide clarity about eligibility and application 
timelines. FRDC created a rubric for grants, so everyone is thinking about the same things as 
they review proposals. They plan to create a separate rubric for evaluating awards. 
 
Discussion: 
• It’s important to have McKean Grant recipients evaluated by alumni because it gives 
additional credibility. Maybe FRDC could establish who those alumni are. 
 
• Other grants should be reviewed by an all-college grant review committee. 
• Executive Council can advocate for an all-college committee, but it’s okay for the 
rationale to exist in the CLA Bylaws. 
• A suggestion was made to have the Student Life Committee (SLC) have governance over 
Student-Faculty Collaborative Scholarships (SFCS), but others noted that the committee 
does not have divisional representation. 
• For the sciences, the SFCS is more serious than a student award. Many departments 
have expectations and standards that part of your scholarship should be organized 
through SFCS, so these need to come from people with scholarly expertise. They are 
judged on scholarly merit and reflect on the sponsoring faculty member’s program. 
• FRDC does not have the time to review SFCS proposals with the given timeline. One 
solution would be for FRDC to have authority to review awards, and the program 
administrators continue with the administrative work. 
 
EC will continue this discussion at their next meeting. 
 
 
Proposal for Standardized PTR Process 
ATTACHMENT #2 
Missy Barnes 
We do not have a formalized process for post-tenure reviews. They tend to be open-ended, and 
departments handle them in a way they deem appropriate. FAC was asked to offer a proposal 
for a formal process that would be used by departments. 
 
Stone made a motion to approve the proposal for standardized PTR Process. Myers seconded 
the motion. 
 
Discussion: 
• We need procedures, but less is more. I recommend cutting the language in the second 
paragraph that refers to “correction of deficiencies. 
• FAC only added things at the bottom of the document. Everything else already exists in 
the Bylaws. 
• We should change the date candidate’s materials are due from January 1st to the first 
day the College is open for business in January to align with other reviews. 
• The Professional Assessment Statement should be limited to 3000 words. 
• Asking for a few syllabi and examples of assignments and a reflection on CIE’s is fine, but 
we don’t need letters from students. 
• I would prefer minimal language about required additional documents. 
• The focus should be on continued professional development and growth, not 
stagnation. The portfolio should show development since the last review. 
• Faculty should only be asked to provide an updated CV, a letter discussing pedagogy, 
and plans for research. 
 
EC voted on the revised proposal. Motion passed unanimously. 
 
 
Meeting adjourned at 1:47 p.m. 
 
ATTACHMENT #1 
 
ARTICLE VII  
STANDING COMMITTEES OF THE FACULTY OF THE COLLEGE OF LIBERAL ARTS 
Section 3. Faculty Research and Development Committee (FRDC)  
Responsibilities and Duties  
The Faculty Research and Development Committee reviews  all internal grant and award proposals and nominations 
for funds set aside for  the Faculty of the College of Liberal Arts and makes recommendations of these grants and 
awards to the appropriate administrator. Grants to be reviewed by the Faculty Research and Development 
Committee include, but are not limited to,  FYRST, Critchfield, Ashforth, Cornell Research, Individual 
Development,  and Course Development grants. Awards to be reviewed by the Faculty Research and Development 
Committee include, but are not limited to, the Cornell Distinguished Faculty Award and Arthur Vining Davis 
Fellowship. This committee oversees and makes necessary revisions to grant and award proposal forms and receives 
and reviews mid-year and final grant and award reports submitted by faculty grant recipients.  
 
Membership  
Membership of the Faculty Research and Development Committee consists of seven voting  
members and three nonvoting members. The voting membership shall be one faculty  
representative from each division of the College of Liberal Arts (elected by division) and one faculty representative 
elected by the Faculty at-large. The non-voting membership includes the Dean of the Faculty, the Director of the 
Endeavor Center, and the Director of Grants and Sponsored Research.  
 
Meetings  
The meetings of the Faculty Research and Development Committee are only open to the Faculty  
when the meeting agenda is not the review or allocation of grants. 
 
  
ATTACHMENT #2 
 
Proposal for a post-tenure review process 
From the CLA Faculty bylaws 8/13/2021 
ARTICLE VIII 
FACULTY APPOINTMENTS AND EVALUATIONS 
D. PROCEDURES FOR POST-TENURE EVALUATIONS 
The CEC, with the support of the Dean of the Faculty, is charged with the responsibility of encouraging improved teaching and 
professional development for all members of the Faculty. Tenured faculty will normally be evaluated every seven years, two 
years before their eligibility for a sabbatical. Exceptions may be recommended by the Dean of the Faculty, with the approval 
of the Faculty Affairs Committee. 
While the primary purpose of continued assessment is to promote improved teaching and professional development, it also 
assists tenured faculty in the identification of strengths and correction of any deficiencies. Should the CEC or the Dean of the 
Faculty detect deficiencies which are particularly significant, the evaluation proceedings may be initiated at any time. 
The faculty member’s professional assessment statements play a primary role in these seven- year evaluations. The faculty 
member creates a professional assessment statement called the Faculty Development Plan. This plan, with supporting 
documents, goes to the members of the CEC to review by January 1. The CEC then meets with the faculty member to discuss 
the professional assessment statement and writes a brief letter of evaluation in response to it, noting their developmental 
assessment of the faculty member and how the plans fit into the department’s goals. This letter is sent to the Dean of the 
Faculty by April 15 of the penultimate year before the faculty member is eligible for a sabbatical. 
Deans play a central role in providing ongoing encouragement and support for faculty efforts at professional development. 
The Dean of the Faculty meets with the faculty member separately to discuss the professional assessment statement, and 
supporting documents, and the letter of the CEC. The Dean of the Faculty then writes a brief letter of evaluation, stating 
points of concurrence or disagreement. The faculty member receives a copy of this letter by August 15 of the evaluation year. 
Both letters, along with the Faculty Development Plan, and other supporting materials, are placed in a file for the faculty 
member that is kept in the office of the Dean of the Faculty. While a faculty member has reasonable latitude for changes of 
professional direction, this file is then used in decisions about release time, requests for funding, and merit awards. 
Timeline for Annual and Post-Tenure Review: 
 
 
 Annual Post-Tenure 
Notification by Dean’s office of eligibility N/A April 15 
CEC formed by: December 1 December 1 
Candidate materials submitted to CEC and (post-tenure only) the 
Dean 
January 1 
(January 19 
for AY 2020- 
2021) 
January 1 
(January 19 for 
AY 2020- 
2021) 
CEC’s letter to Dean and candidate by: February 15 April 15 
Dean’s letter to candidate and CEC by: N/A August 15 
 
 
**Recommended addition to the bylaws (proposed process for post-tenure review): 
The Post-tenure review process will include teaching observations arranged between the CEC and the faculty member under 
review. 
Collection of Materials for Review 
The faculty member undergoing post-tenure review will upload the following materials to Canvas by first business day of 
College in January. 
1. CV 
2. Professional Assessment Statement, up to 3,000 words including:  
• All relevant professional activities are addressed: teaching, research and scholarship, and College service.  
o How the faculty member has developed professionally since the last formal evaluation. 
o How the faculty member’s research interests and professional activities constitute a coherent path of 
development connected to their work on campus and to the larger wider community 
• The statement includes a reflection on student evaluations & the assessment of her/his successes and failures, as well 
as a plan for future development.  
 
Bunch of Busy Work that is already available  
3. CEC may request additional materials  Prior departmental evaluations 
4. Teaching Portfolio–including a selection of relevant materials such as: 
a. Sample Syllabi 
b. Sample Assignments 
c. Examples of Student Work 
d. Reflection on Student Evaluations 
e. Letters from former students 
5. Examples of research or creative activity 
 
Rationale: 
At this time there is no process in place for the Post-tenure review. This proposal would offer some structure to the process 
for all departments. 
 
 


Minutes, Executive Committee Meeting, Thursday, April 7, 2022

Judd, Amanda, \u2795

26
Amanda Judd ’95
PHOTOGRAPHY
CONVITE
A traditional folkloric parade, a convite is a celebration of festivities in many rural 
!ǋǉǋǋǊǋ?ǉǉǋǋǉǊǋ
ǊǊǋ'ǋǋǊé
to modern-day superheroes. The costumes can indicate celebration or even frustration 
Ǌǋ
Ǌ	@ǃǊ
Ǌǋ
Ǌǋǋǉ?.ǊǊǋǋǋǊ
of a Refuge International medical mission in the community of Purulhá, Baja Verapaz, 
Guatemala as a way of showing thanks to the participants from many of the patients and 
drivers who received services that week.


Convite

Gilkey, Dassika

49
<PMZQVOaW]OI^MUM[\QTT_ZIX[IZW]VLUaUQLLTMÅVOMZ
squeezing like an angry snake —
They say pent up desire can turn to anger.
I missed your eyes
and how they’d stare at me,
lingering after a quiet convo we just had,
darting after I said something that made your heart rise a bit,
dancing after we had maybe just too much to drink
IVLaW]NMT\KWUNWZ\IJTMMVW]OP\WÅVITTaKTW[M\PMU
XWQ[WV¸J]\_MKW]TLV¼\\I[\M\PMLQٺMZMVKMQ\_I[[W[_MM\
You didn’t really give me this ring —
I just held onto it hoping that you wouldn’t ask for it back,
hoping I’ll have some of  you with me,
hoping that part of  us is still wrapped around
just waiting to be unraveled into something more.
 
Will this bite?
 
Maybe
I guess we’ll never truly know.
WILL THIS BITE?
Dassika Gilkey
My name is Dassika 
and I’m a Theatre 
Performance major 
with minors in Studio 
Art and Film Studies. 
#ǋ1*,%=6?:
FM as Music Director 
and at Brushing as 
Co-Designer. Normally 
I express my art 
through visual forms, 
like photography or 
painting, but I’ve 
chosen to write a poem 
to submit for the 50th 
Edition because I was 
inspired by a writer 
I know. This piece 
explores feelings of 
falling for someone, 
something I feel happens 
a little too easy for me. 
I love using metaphors 
of animals to walk 
through my stories – 
here I follow the idea of 
a snake.  


Will This Bite?

Curriculum Committee

Rollins College 
Rollins Scholarship Online 
Curriculum Committee Minutes College of Liberal Arts Minutes and Reports 
6-1-2022 
Annual Report, Curriculum Committee, 2021-2022 
Curriculum Committee 
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.rollins.edu/as_cc 
 1 
Final Report of the 2021-2022 Curriculum Committee 
Submitted by Jill Jones, Chair of the 2021-2022 CC 
 
 
Curriculum Committee Membership 2021-2022 
The Curriculum Committee 2021-2022 was constituted of the following eleven voting members: 
 
Divisional Representatives: 
Business: Mark Heileman 
Expressive Arts: Robin Gerchman 
Humanities: Jill Jones 
Science and Mathematics: Samantha Douguet 
Social Sciences: Yusheng Yao 
Social Sciences-Applied: Sarah Parsloe 
At-Large Representatives: 
Raghabendra KC, Gloria Cook, Rochelle Elva, Susan Montgomery 
SGA Representative: Zoe Pearson 
 
   Chair, Subcommittee Chairs and Membership 
Chair: Jill Jones (liaison to EC) 
Secretary:  Susan Montgomery 
New Course Subcommittee: Rochelle Elva, Raghabendra KC, Sarah Parsloe, 
Academic Appeals Committee: Samantha Douguet, Robin Gerchman 
Subcommittee on Registration: Gloria Cook, Mark Heileman, Yusheng Yao  
________________________________________________________________ 
The Non-Voting Members included in the Bylaws are the Dean of Faculty (represented by Ashley 
Kistler this year) and the Registrar, Stephanie Henning.  
Other relevant, important, and useful-to-the-committee regular attendees included: Rob Sanders, 
Toni Holbrook, Tiffany Griffin 
 
Remaining Business 
 The Curriculum Committee did a great deal of the usual kind of business this year.  The 
changes to majors, minors, name changes to programs, and closing of programs can all be found in 
the minutes, as can the recommendations for Position Requests and any number of other matters.  
 
 However, the 2021-2022 CC left one important bit of business for the next Executive 
Committee and the CLA faculty to consider.   
 
 The Curriculum Committee received the report and recommendations from the Curricular 
Optimization Task Force (COTF) in March 2022.  After much discussion and consideration, 
listening to our colleagues across disciplines and departments, the Curriculum Committee makes the 
following recommendations to the CLA faculty.  Our own decisions, as outlined in the faculty 
Bylaws, are to make decisions based on the mission of the college, what is best pedagogically, for the 
 2 
college, for faculty’s ability to teach, and thus what is best for student learning.  Thus, we would like 
to thank the COTF for its work and its research into these matters.   
 
The Curriculum Committee endorsed the first recommendation by the COTF, with the 
added stipulation that Rollins remain a one tuition model and that Intersession be included in that 
tuition.  The recommendation is below: 
The Curriculum Committee received the following Recommendation from the Curricular Optimization Task 
Force Report, regarding credit hours required for graduation: 
• That Rollins change the required credit hours for graduation to 128 credit hours, with the following 
stipulations: 
a. That the minimum number of elective credit hours be increased from 16 (4, 4-credit classes) to 20 (5, 4-
credit classes) 
b. That no major program requirements exceed more than one half of a student’s total credits required for 
graduation 
The Curriculum Committee amended and endorsed the following Recommendation from 
the Curricular Optimization Task Force Report, regarding credit hours for graduation: 
• That Rollins change the required credit hours for graduation to 128 credit hours, with the following 
stipulations: 
a. That the minimum number of elective credit hours be increased from 16 (4, 4-credit classes) to 20 (5, 4-
credit classes) 
b. That no major program requirements exceed more than one half of a student’s total credits required for 
graduation 
c. That CLA’s policy of the single tuition cost model be continued (that there are no 
additional costs for classes taken during the fall and spring semesters) and be extended to 
Intersession. 
The Curriculum Committee did NOT endorse the COTF’s recommendation for standard course 
caps, feeling that neither a one-size-fits-all-model nor proscriptive enforced numbers are in the best 
interest of faculty or of students. Recognizing the individual needs of different courses and different 
classes, we recommend that departments continue to set their own course caps with an emphasis on 
best practices and pedagogy as well as the recognition of student need.   We also recognize that the 
Rollins mission and the Rollins promise embrace small class size, student/professor relationships, 
and excellent pedagogy which we believe requires faculty agency.   
 
We did propose the following recommendations, but do not endorse them as anything other than 
guidelines.  Below is the motion endorsed by the Curriculum Committee for Proposed Guidelines 
for course enrollments: 
 
 3 
  
 4 
Curriculum Committee’s Proposed Guidelines for Course Enrollments 
 
Background 
 
The Curriculum Committee makes its recommendation based on the Rollins mission and best 
pedagogical practices. 
 
Recommendations: 
Recognizing the individual needs of different courses and different classes, we recommend that departments continue to 
set their own course caps with an emphasis on best practices and pedagogy as well as the recognition of student need.   
We also recognize that the Rollins mission and the Rollins promise embrace small class size, student/professor 
relationships, and excellent pedagogy which we believe requires faculty agency.   
 
We propose the following recommendations, but do not endorse them as anything other than guidelines. 
 
Standard Caps 
We recommend the cap for standard courses be set between 17 and 24 students with the 
consent of the instructor and the department chair.  
 
General Education Course Caps 
rFLA   
The standard caps for rFLA courses are as follows:  rFLA 100, 24; rFLA 200, 22; rFLA 300 18. 
These caps have long been in practice for rFLA and are listed as guidelines on the rFLA course 
proposal form.  
 
RCC 
RCC classes will be capped at 18, in keeping with longstanding practice at Rollins.    
 
Competency Courses 
• We recommend WCMP courses be capped at 17, in keeping with the practices of our 
benchmark institutions. 
• We recommend MCMP courses be capped at 24, in keeping with the practices of our 
benchmark institutions.  
• We recommend FCMP courses be capped at 18 as will global language courses at all 
levels.  
• We recommend ECMP courses be capped according to standard cap for the level of 
the course listed above. 
 
 
Courses with Special Considerations 
The following courses have special consideration due to space limitations that impact the course 
size.  
 
Performing Arts and Fine Arts 
Performing Arts and Fine Arts classes will follow the above stated standard course caps, except 
when studio space/limited equipment constrains the size of a class. 
 
 5 
Science courses 
Science courses will follow the above stated standard course caps, except when lab space constrains 
the size of a class. 
 
Course Minimums 
Rollins traditionally runs courses with 8 or more students. However, we recommend a course 
have a minimum of 6 enrolled students to move forward, in keeping with the practices of 
our benchmark group. 
 
In situations where a required non-elective major/minor course has fewer than 6 students and it 
serves a timely need for any of the remaining enrolled students, we recommend that faculty and 
department chairs determine the course status on a case-by-case basis. 
 
Requests for Lower Course Caps 
Faculty can submit requests for lower course caps for their courses with an accompanying rationale 
to the Dean of Faculty. 
  
We ask that these items be put on the agenda as early next year as is possible.  As 
this year’s CC chair, I’d like to attend both the EC meeting where these items get discussed  
to introduce the items at the CLA meeting when they are presented, to represent the 
reasoning (to the best of my ability) of the committee who passed forward these agenda 
items.  
 


Annual Report, Curriculum Committee, 2021-2022

Faculty Affairs Committee,

Rollins College 
Rollins Scholarship Online 
Faculty Affairs Committee Minutes College of Liberal Arts Minutes and Reports 
10-4-2022 
Minutes, Faculty Affairs Committee Meeting, Tuesday, October 4, 
2022 
Faculty Affairs Committee 
College of Liberal Arts, Rollins College 
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.rollins.edu/as_fa 
Recommended Citation 
Faculty Affairs Committee, "Minutes, Faculty Affairs Committee Meeting, Tuesday, October 4, 2022" 
(2022). Faculty Affairs Committee Minutes. 92. 
https://scholarship.rollins.edu/as_fa/92 
This Minutes is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Liberal Arts Minutes and Reports at 
Rollins Scholarship Online. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Affairs Committee Minutes by an 
authorized administrator of Rollins Scholarship Online. For more information, please contact rwalton@rollins.edu. 
Faculty Affairs Committee 
 
Meeting Minutes 
Meeting of Oct. 4th, 2022 
12:30pm – 1:45pm 
 
Location: Webex/tfrench 
 
In attendance: 
Business – Mark Heileman (2022-2024) 
Expressive Arts – MacKenzie Moon Ryan—on leave Oct.-May (2022-2024), Substitution of Thomas 
Ouellette beginning October 2022 
Humanities - Todd French (2021-2023) 
Science and Mathematics - Sabrice Guerrier (2021-2023) 
Social Sciences - Stephanie Gonzalez Guittar (2021-2023) 
Social Sciences Applied – Allen Johnson (2022-2023) 
At large rep - Caitlyn Bennett (2021-2023) 
At large rep – Stacey Dunn (2022-2024) 
At large rep – Hesham Mesbah (2021-2023) 
Amy Armenia 
 
I. Call to Order 
 
II. Approval of Minutes from Sept. 20th, 2022 
a. Motion to approve minutes – Sabrice 
b. Second – Stacey 
c. All in favor; 1 abstention (Thomas was not in attendance last meeting); minutes approved 
 
III. Welcome to Professor Ouellette 
 
IV. Report from EC Meeting 
a. Update on Fall Break move 
i. Todd provided update based on Saturday (9/29/22) meetings. 
 
V. Continuing Business 
a. Teaching Evaluation Models  
i. Discussion of creating plan for moving forward with proposals and timeline. 
ii. FAC members worked in groups of 3 to review proposal and timeline via 
jamboard. 
iii. Todd to introduce FACs work on proposal at next faculty meeting, including 
potential to modify the current CIE to more accurately capture effective teaching.  
1. Introduction to also include recommendation of having Nancy Chick host 
discussion on what might be considered “excellent” teaching.  
b. Announcement from Amy Armenia on Sabbatical communication 
i. Discussion of faculty being required to complete sabbatical proposal prior to 
sabbatical being approved, as indicated in faculty handbook. 
c. Continued reflection on Faculty quality of work/life 
 
VI. Adjourn  
a. Motion to adjourn – Stacey 
b. Second – Stephanie 
c. Meeting adjourned 
 
 


Minutes, Faculty Affairs Committee Meeting, Tuesday, October 4, 2022

College of Liberal Arts Executive Committee,

Rollins College 
Rollins Scholarship Online 
Executive Committee Minutes College of Liberal Arts Minutes and Reports 
12-6-2022 
Minutes, Executive Committee Meeting, Tuesday, December 6, 
2022 
College of Liberal Arts Executive Committee 
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.rollins.edu/as_ec 
Recommended Citation 
College of Liberal Arts Executive Committee, "Minutes, Executive Committee Meeting, Tuesday, December 
6, 2022" (2022). Executive Committee Minutes. 259. 
https://scholarship.rollins.edu/as_ec/259 
This Minutes is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Liberal Arts Minutes and Reports at 
Rollins Scholarship Online. It has been accepted for inclusion in Executive Committee Minutes by an authorized 
administrator of Rollins Scholarship Online. For more information, please contact rwalton@rollins.edu. 
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING 
Tuesday, December 6, 2022 
Woolson House 4:00-5:15pm 
Present 
Rosana Diaz-Zambrana, Hannah Ewing, Todd French, Kevin Griffin, Emmanuel Kodzi, Jana 
Mathews, Daniel Myers, Anne Murdaugh, Emily Russell 
 
Call to Order 
Jana Mathews called the meeting to order at 4:03 PM.   
 
Meeting Context  
This meeting was convened for 2 reasons: 
a) To complete the discussion from the December 1 EC Meeting and finalize 
recommendations about the Dean Search Process. There was the need to complete this 
work and provide recommendations to the Provost ahead of the final faculty meeting on 
December 7, where the Provost was expected to outline the search process.  
b) To discuss the Budget updates provided by the VP of Business and Finance 
 
Motion to go into committee of the whole by Ewing, second by French. After a sense of 
direction had emerged the meeting returned to the regular format for specific motions to be made 
and voted on. 
 
Budget Conversation 
The general sentiment was that reports from Ed Kania were useful to the extent that it provided 
information. For example, the information about the relationship between student numbers and 
tuition and discount rate was helpful for understanding some of the administrative challenges; 
and it might be useful to bring all faculty to a similar understanding. However, these briefings 
were not designed to provide clear opportunities for input in the prioritization of budgetary lines. 
The briefings were instituted on a trial basis by the President, and it is appropriate in this 
assessment to note that while it is more than what EC had in the past, it is much less than what 
EC had envisaged in terms of participation. There were suggestions about having the CLA Dean 
serve as a member of Cabinet to add academic weight to the budget discussions. There were 
suggestions about creating an institutional dashboard with important an agreed set of metrics as 
indicators of our priorities and financial health. The consensus was that in place of the previous 
Finance and Services Committee (see Appendix), we could have a team working for about 3 
months to come up with appropriate metrics for a dashboard. Updates to faculty or EC would be 
made based on this dashboard. The included metrics may vary going forward as strategic 
institutional interests change. 
 
MOTION to propose the creation of an institutional financial dashboard under the direction of a 
faculty team that will research and request specific metrics to be included in the dashboard. 
Moved by Mathews, second by Kodzi; Motion passed. 
 
MOTION to propose the inclusion of the Dean of CLA Faculty in the President’s Cabinet. 
Moved by Mathews, second by Myers; Motion passed. 
 
Dean Position Terms and Hiring Process  
Based on the December 1 EC meeting, the following recommendations had already been voted 
on: 
1. Recommend to the Provost a single Dean of the CLA faculty. Passed 8-0. 
2. Recommend to the Provost an internal search. Passed 7-1. 
3. Recommend to the Provost that the position have a fixed term of 5-7 years. Failed 1-7. 
 
Therefore, discussions began from the term of the CLA Dean, and continued through 
recommendations about the process. In terms of process, the committee referenced best practices 
from FIU and Yale, as well as a conversation with a former Dean. There was discussion about 
transparency of process and a public portion of the process for legitimacy, while including blind 
reviews of responses to behavioral questions as well. 
 
MOTION to propose a 5-year term for the Dean of CLA Faculty with the option to reapply for 
another 5 years. Moved by Russell, second by Ewing; Motion passed 7-1. 
 
MOTION to propose a 3-year term for Associate Deans with the option of a 2-year extension if 
the individuals can make a specific case for why the 2 extra years are needed to see a project or 
initiative through to completion. Moved by Russell, second by Ewing; Motion passed 7-1. 
 
MOTION to propose the inclusion of a public component for the hiring process of the Dean of 
CLA Faculty. Moved by Ewing, second by Myers; Motion passed 6-2.  
 
The full set of recommendations is included in the Appendix. 
 
 
Adjournment 
French moved to adjourn, seconded by Myers. Meeting adjourned at 5:13 PM. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
Appendix 
Recommendations by EC to the Provost regarding the Dean Search and Process 
1. Recommend to the Provost a single Dean of CLA Faculty. 
2. Recommend to the Provost an internal search for the Dean of CLA Faculty. 
3. Recommend to the Provost that the Dean of CLA Faculty position have a 5-year term 
with the option to reapply in an open application process 
4. Recommend to the Provost that Dean of CLA Faculty serve alongside the Provost on 
Cabinet. 
5. Recommend to the Provost that the Associate Dean positions be 3-year rotating positions 
with the option to extend for 2 additional years if the individuals can make a specific case 
for why the 2 extra years are needed to see a project or initiative through to completion. 
6. Recommend to the Provost that Dean of CLA Faculty hiring process include a public 
component. 
Hiring Process Recommendations (in line with best practices) 
A. encourage nominations and self-nominations 
B. publish the position description; the names and titles of search committee members; hip 
the search timeline and process  
C. require DEI and anti-bias training for search committee members  
D. require confidentiality of the search committee 
E. establish clear rules of engagement for committee meetings and interviews, including 
asking the same set of questions to all candidates 
F. have the search committee offer strengths and weaknesses of all finalists  
In addition to these suggestions, which may already be in place: 
I. We suggest that the application consist of a letter of interest, cv, and written responses to 
a set of behavioral interview questions. We recommend that the entire committee's 
review and analysis of the behavioral responses be blind. 
II. Regarding when and how it is most appropriate to stage the public component of the 
search process, we leave it to the discretion of the search committee. We believe a public 
component (ex. a 10-minute "this is my vision for the role" followed up by a Q&A) will 
buttress the legitimacy of the process and promote inclusivity, engagement, and 
transparency. We also recommend inviting faculty (and other constituents) to submit 
written feedback on "campus visits" to the search committee for review.  
 
  
2012 Bylaws 
 
Section 4.   The Finance and Service Committee 
 
Responsibilities. The Finance and Service Committee consults with the administration and serves as an 
advocate on issues related to finance and general services of Arts and Sciences. Such concerns include, 
but are not restricted to, issues related to budget, salary and benefits, student financial planning, tuition 
and fees, physical plant, campus safety, bookstore, food service, and personnel. 
 
Membership. Membership to the Finance and Service Committee consists of twelve voting members: six 
elected from the faculty, one at large member from the College of Professional Studies, two staff 
members elected by members of the staff, and three student representatives selected by the Student 
Government Association. The students shall be appointed at the beginning of the academic year and 
remain on the Committee for a period of one year. The College of Professional Studies representative 
shall recuse him or herself from voting on matters strictly pertaining to Arts and Sciences. 
 
Section 5.   Authority 
 
All committee recommendations become policy when approved by the Faculty. 
 
All policies shall be implemented by the appropriate administrators of Rollins College. 
 
When policies and their implications are unclear, administrators will be guided by the advice of the 
appropriate committee. 
 
Standing committees seeking clarification of policy implementation shall confer directly with the 
appropriate administrator.   
  
 
Current Bylaws: 
Section 2.  Authority of the Faculty of the College of Liberal Arts 
  
As stipulated in the College Bylaws (Article IV), the jurisdiction of the faculty lies in “all matters 
pertaining to the order, instruction, and academic discipline of the College, and . . . primary responsibility 
for the content, quality, and effectiveness of the curriculum of the College.” 
  
All recommendations falling within this jurisdiction become policy when approved by the faculty. All 
such policies shall be implemented by the appropriate administrators of Rollins College. 
When policies and their implications are unclear, administrators will be guided by the advice of the 
appropriate committee. 
  
Standing committees seeking clarification of policy implementation shall confer directly with the 
appropriate administrator. 
 


Minutes, Executive Committee Meeting, Tuesday, December 6, 2022

Rollins College 
Rollins Scholarship Online 
Executive Committee Minutes College of Liberal Arts Minutes and Reports 
12-1-2022 
Minutes, Executive Committee Meeting, Thursday, December 1, 
2022 
College of Liberal Arts Executive Committee 
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.rollins.edu/as_ec 
Recommended Citation 
College of Liberal Arts Executive Committee, "Minutes, Executive Committee Meeting, Thursday, 
December 1, 2022" (2022). Executive Committee Minutes. 260. 
https://scholarship.rollins.edu/as_ec/260 
This Minutes is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Liberal Arts Minutes and Reports at 
Rollins Scholarship Online. It has been accepted for inclusion in Executive Committee Minutes by an authorized 
administrator of Rollins Scholarship Online. For more information, please contact rwalton@rollins.edu. 
Executive Committee Agenda 
Thursday, December 1, 2022 
Woolson House 12:30-1:45pm 
 
I. Approval of November10, 2022 EC Meeting Minutes 
 
II. Announcements 
 
III. Committee Reports 
a. CC 
b. FAC 
 
IV. Business 
a. Academic Credit Hour Policy 
b. Full and Part-Time Student Enrollment Policy 
c. Sodexo Employees Union Resolution 
d. Revised FRDC Bylaws Change Proposal 
e. Develop New Faculty Line Request Evaluation Criteria 
f. CLA Dean Position Terms and Hiring Process 
 
V. Set December 7 CLA Meeting Agenda 
 
 
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING 
December 1, 2022, Minutes 
 
Present 
Grant Cornwell, Rosana Diaz-Zambrana, Hannah Ewing, Todd French, Kevin Griffin, 
Emmanuel Kodzi, Akheem Mitchell, Daniel Myers, Anne Murdaugh, Nancy Niles, Emily 
Russell, Rob Sanders, Susan Singer 
 
Meeting Context  
Emmanuel Kodzi led the meeting, substituting for CLA faculty president Jana Mathews.   
 
Call to Order 
Emmanuel Kodzi called the meeting to order at 12:30 PM.   
 
Approval of Minutes from November 2, 2022, EC Meeting  
Griffin motioned to approve the minutes from the November 2 meeting, seconded by Niles. 
Motion passed unanimously. 
 
Announcements 
Sanders announced a Celebration Event for fall graduates. Holt has a new matrix with classes 
beginning at 6:00 PM and 7:30 PM. Beginning in the fall, some Holt classes will transition to a 
hybrid model with up to 50% remote instruction. Singer announced the grant from HHMI 
obtained by the Science Division faculty. Cornwell announced the faculty holiday party. 
FAC Committee Report  
Todd French   
Members of the committee are testing new course evaluation methods. Todd is collecting 
feedback from departments regarding their discussions of effective teaching. FAC has discussed 
issues of course caps in 100-200 level courses and equity in course loads. There has also been 
discussion of creating a subcommittee to evaluate equity issues in budget and spending. 
 
CC Committee Report  
 Emily Russell  
CC has moved forward two policies related to SACS accreditation and is considering policies 
from Holt school re: transfer credit. The committee met with the sustainable development goals 
steering committee and conducted a design thinking workshop. 
 
Russell suggested that CC should review Holt’s plans for hybrid courses; Sanders stated that the 
planned amount of remote teaching is within current college guidelines. 
 
 
NEW BUSINESS 
 
Academic Credit Hour Policy 
This is a reapproval of current policy regarding academic credit for courses. 
 
Russell moved to approve the policy, seconded by Ewing. Motion passed unanimously. 
 
Full- and Part-Time Student Enrollment Policy 
This is a reapproval of current policy regarding course loads for full- and part-time students. 
 
Russell moved to approve the policy, seconded by Ewing. Motion passed unanimously. 
 
Sodexo Employees Union Resolution 
The resolution (item 1 in the Appendix) expresses support for dining service workers employed 
by Sodexo and endorses a fair process as they decide whether to form a union. Following 
approval by EC, the resolution will proceed to the full faculty. 
 
French moved to approve the resolution, seconded by Niles. Motion passed unanimously. 
 
FRDC Bylaws  
The proposed change (item 2 in the Appendix) restores language keeping review of the Student-
Faculty Collaborative Scholarship proposals under the purview of FRDC. Review of SFCS was 
removed from FRDC’s responsibilities during revisions last year. 
 
French moved to approve the resolution, seconded by Niles. Motion passed 7-0 with Russell 
abstaining. 
 
Following the vote, Singer raised concerns that the bylaws specify FRDC reviews “all” internal 
grants and awards, but this is not consistent with practice for the McKean grant, which is 
overseen by the Provost’s office and reviewed by an external committee. 
 
These bylaw changes must now come before the faculty. 
 
Faculty Line Request Evaluation 
Divided into groups to consider the list of criteria used for evaluating faculty line requests during 
the 2021-22 request cycle. Revisions were proposed and discussed, with the group 
collaboratively agreeing on the following set of criteria for this year’s reviews: 
 
• This position supports and moves forward the mission and strategic priorities of the 
college. 
• This position enhances diversity and inclusion initiatives of the department or college. 
• This position provides essential content coverage for the department or college. 
• This position serves essential and unmet teaching needs of the department or college. 
• This position enhances collaborative opportunities within the department or across the 
college. 
 
Dean Position Terms and Hiring Process  
Kodzi summarized results from the online faculty survey, which showed a small majority in 
favor of a rotating term and 46% vs 41% in favor of an internal vs. external search. The group 
discussed the results showing a strong consensus for a single Dean of the CLA faculty. 
 
Kodzi moved to recommend to the Provost a single Dean of the CLA faculty, seconded by 
Russell. Motion passed unanimously. 
 
The group discussed the option of recommending an internal vs. national search. Myers and 
Murdaugh discussed the Science Division’s feedback on that question. 
 
Kodzi moved to recommend to the Provost an internal search, seconded by Ewing. Motion 
passed 7-1. 
 
The group discussed models for appointments, including the possibility of a fixed-term 
appointment vs. an initial term with possibility of extension vs. a renewable contract. Singer 
noted that absolute terms can make it difficult to manage leadership transitions. 
 
Russell moved to recommend to the Provost that the position have a fixed-term of 5-7 years, 
seconded by French. The motion failed 1-7. 
 
Adjournment 
Griffin moved to adjourn, seconded by Myers. Meeting adjourned at 1:52 PM. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Appendix 
 
Sodexo Resolution Proposal 
Whereas, community is one of the guiding principles in our mission statement, and we are dedicated to 
social responsibility. 
Whereas, we value all members of our community, whether they are our students, staff, fellow faculty 
members, or subcontracted workers. 
Whereas, the campus dining service workers employed by Sodexo perform an essential role in our 
community by feeding us safe and healthy meals. 
Be it resolved that the faculty of Rollins College support the campus dining service workers employed by 
Sodexo in their effort to seek a fair process to decide whether to form a union. 
 
 
And here’s some context from Matt Nichter: 
 
A group of Sodexo employees at Rollins have taken the initial steps to affiliate with UNITE HERE Local 362, 
a labor union that also represents workers at Disney World and the Orlando airport.  
  
Among the issues they may want to address through collective bargaining are low wages, unaffordable 
health insurance, seasonal layoffs with uncertain rehire, and inadequate retirement provisions.   
  
Although it is technically illegal to fire or otherwise retaliate against workers who express interest in 
joining a union, such practices are commonplace in the U.S.   
  
For this reason, UNITE HERE is encouraging Rollins faculty to pass a resolution affirming our commitment 
to an intimidation-free decision process for the Sodexo workers on our campus.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ARTICLE VII  
STANDING COMMITTEES OF THE FACULTY OF THE COLLEGE OF LIBERAL 
ARTS 
Section 3. Faculty Research and Development Committee (FRDC)  
Responsibilities and Duties  
The Faculty Research and Development Committee reviews  all internal grant and award 
proposals and nominations for funds set aside for  the Faculty of the College of Liberal Arts and 
makes recommendations of these grants and awards to the appropriate administrator. Grants to 
be reviewed by the Faculty Research and Development Committee include, but are not limited 
to, grants supporting teaching and research, including FYRST, Critchfield, Ashforth, Cornell 
Research, Individual Development,  and Course Development grants. Awards to be reviewed by 
the Faculty Research and Development Committee include, but are not limited to, the Cornell 
Distinguished Faculty Award and Arthur Vining Davis Fellowship.Proposals for the Student 
Faculty Collaborative Scholarship program will also be evaluated by this committee. This 
committee oversees and makes necessary revisions to grant and award proposal forms and 
receives and reviews mid-year and final grant and award reports submitted by faculty grant 
recipients.  
 
Membership  
Membership of the Faculty Research and Development Committee consists of seven voting  
members and three nonvoting members. The voting membership shall be one faculty  
representative from each division of the College of Liberal Arts (elected by division) and one 
faculty representative elected by the Faculty at-large. The non-voting membership includes the 
Dean of the Faculty, the Director of the Endeavor Center, and the Director of Grants and 
Sponsored Research.  
 
Meetings  
The meetings of the Faculty Research and Development Committee are only open to the Faculty  
when the meeting agenda is not the review or allocation of grants. 
 
 
 


Minutes, Executive Committee Meeting, Thursday, December 1, 2022

Rollins College 
Rollins Scholarship Online 
Curriculum Committee Minutes College of Liberal Arts Minutes and Reports 
8-30-2022 
Minutes, Curriculum Committee Meeting, Tuesday, August 30, 
2022 
Curriculum Committee 
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.rollins.edu/as_cc 
Curriculum Committee 
Meeting Minutes (approved 9/6/2022) 
August 30, 2022 
 
In attendance: Emily Russell (chair), Samantha Fonseca-Douguet, Mattea Garcia, Robin 
Gerchman, Raghabendra KC, Susan Montgomery, Perry Middleton, Kasandra Riley, Marc Sardy, 
Steve Schoen, Yusheng Yao, Steve Booker, Tiffany Griffin, Stephanie Henning, Toni Holbrook, 
Ashley Kistler 
 
I. Member introductions: When you think of the most meaningful work to come out of 
Curriculum Committee, what examples come to mind? 
i. Work on subcommittees 
ii. Discussions regarding CLA graduation credit requirement 
iii.  Review of position request proposals 
iv. General education course requirements 
 
II. Review committee charge (see Bylaws language attached) 
a. Proposal to eliminate CC role in position review (discuss and vote Sept. 6) 
 
III. Volunteer for subcommittee assignments 
a. Secretary: R. Gerchman 
b. New Course Proposals: K. Riley, M. Sardy, S. Montgomery, (A. Kistler) 
c. Registration: Y. Yao, S. Fonseca-Douguet, (S. Henning) 
d. Academic Appeals: M. Garcia, S. Schoen, (T. Griffin, S. Henning) 
 
IV. Alternative options re: commencement calendar/scheduling (non-voting item) 
a. Move commencement to a weekday 
i. Difficult for some families 
b. Move Holt commencement to Friday night 
c. Combine Holt and Crummer graduate programs commencements on Friday night 
d. Combine CLA and Crummer commencements on same day 
e. Combine CLA and Holt commencements on same day 
i. Logistically not feasible for facilities, parking and move-out of Res Halls 
f. Alternate years between CLA, Holt, and Crummer so CLA is not on Mother’s Day 
each year 
i. Does not resolve challenges faced with other options 
ii. Option to move intersession from January to May to have commencement 
one week earlier 
1. Not ideal for study abroad or immersion programming 
2. Students may need both intersession and Maymester to take 
necessary classes for graduation 
 
Q: Should moving CLA commencement date be a priority for the college? 
A: Yes. This has been an ongoing conversation regarding Mother’s Day 
commencement date. However, student affairs would need to provide input 
regarding this recommendation. 
 
V. Shared expectations for CC meetings 
i. Wide balance of voices around the table 
ii. At-large representatives would like to be identified as at-large reps and 
not divisional reps 
iii.  Divisional representatives speak to the divisional perspective; however, 
they should feel free to express opinion 
iv. Allow time for secretary to speak 
v. Push back against any competition to speak 
vi. Speak generally when sharing committee information with those outside 
of the committee; if speaking specifically, ask permission to identify 
person prior to sharing committee information 
 
VI. What does preparation for CC meetings look like? 
i. Please put aside time to review upcoming agenda and any necessary 
documents (which are located on Canvas page) 
 
 
Adjourned 1:45pm 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ARTICLE VII STANDING COMMITTEES OF THE FACULTY OF THE COLLEGE OF LIBERAL ARTS  
 
Section 1. The Curriculum Committee (CC)  
 
Responsibilities and Duties 
The Curriculum Committee reviews and approves all policy matters concerning curriculum for all 
undergraduate and graduate academic programs (regular, summer session, and special programs, 
e.g. intersession), general education requirements, student academic standards and honors, 
academic advising, continuing and graduate education programs of Rollins College including the 
Hamilton Holt School, and all matters pertaining to academic schedules and calendars.  
 
The Committee reviews departmental proposals for faculty lines with supporting information from 
the Dean of the Faculty and offers comment to the Dean of the Faculty and departments with a 
period of optional revision. The Executive Committee of the Faculty makes the final 
recommendations to the Dean of the Faculty and Provost about line allocation.  
 
The Committee monitors the alignment of staffing and enrollment within and across departments 
and ensures that academic policies are clearly and unambiguously stated and consistent with the 
mission of the College.  
 
 
Membership 
The Curriculum Committee is constituted of eleven voting members and two non-voting members. 
The voting membership shall be one faculty representative from each division of the College of 
Liberal Arts (elected by division), four faculty representatives elected by the Faculty at-large, and one 
student selected by the Student Government Association. The non-voting membership includes the 
Dean of the Faculty and the registrar(s). 
 


Rollins College

Not a member yet