Faculty Meeting Minutes
February 7, 2025
Murray Aikins Dining Hall, 2nd Floor/Zoom
Dorothy E. Mosby, Dean of the Faculty and Vice President for Academic Affairs called the meeting to order at 3:34 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Dean Mosby asked if there were any corrections to, or comments regarding, the minutes of the Faculty Meeting held December 6, 2024. Hearing none, she moved to approve the minutes; the motion was seconded and they were approved.
OLD BUSINESS
There was no old business.
NEW BUSINESS
There was no new business.
FACULTY EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Associate Professor Dominique Vuvan presented the Committee of Committees report to the faculty on behalf of the Faculty Executive Committee. Please find that report here.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Professors David Cohen and Mark Youndt presented to the faculty a preview of their upcoming workshop on reading Skidmore鈥檚 financial statements. Please find that presentation here.
Associate Professor Tim Harper shared with the faculty the work that is being done with the Huron Consulting Group. He explained that the interviews with Huron have been broken down into groups, with Professor Harper and Associate Professor Nick Junkerman representing the faculty in the Operations Group and the Academic Portfolio Leadership Group, where they are joined by faculty members Associate Professor Maggie Greaves and Associate Professor Dominique Vuvan 鈥� representing Curriculum Committee and Faculty Executive Committee, respectively. Professor Harper explained that the meetings consist of structured interviews, with each meeting building on the answers given in the previous one. Some examples of the questions asked were: 鈥淗ow long have you been at Skidmore? What are some key areas of responsibility in your role? What does your unit do? Why and how is your unit successful? What are some areas for improvement at Skidmore? How does your unit collaborate with other departments?鈥�
Some key elements of the work that Huron is doing will be financial modeling, academic portfolio cost containment and areas of opportunity for revenue generation, the last of which Professor Harper noted came up in the Faculty Forum. He emphasized that they are not coming in to be directive, but that they will be giving us research and analysis of their findings, and faculty committees and administration will be choosing how to move forward with the information and recommendations we receive. Professor Harper said that he believes that Huron that we are and will remain a mission-driven institution. He noted that they are very focused on the functions of the various roles, and where they may be redundancy or overlap. Huron has also asked a number of questions about the ways in which the faculty interact with Finance & Administration, what kinds of information are exchanged, and whether and what kind of feedback is coming from the faculty to Vice President of Finance and Administration Dan Konstalid. Professor Harper then invited questions from the faculty.
A staff member in Academic Affairs asked when we can expect to receive the findings. Professor Harper indicated that he did not have a date, but expects that it will be during the summer.
A faculty member asked how the groups were formed, and if one would know by now whether or not they will be interviewed. Dean Mosby answered that there will be additional rounds of interviews, and so you may still be tapped to participate. If you feel that you have input that would be significant, your best course of action is to reach out to your divisional Vice President to request the opportunity to interview with Huron.
A faculty member asked what the process will look like after the findings are released to the College, and whether or not Huron will be involved in implementation. Professor Harper said that his understanding is that the leads of the various groups and the division heads will be able to input data into the models provided by Huron, and that those models will stand in place regardless of a continued working relationship with the consulting group. He said that he would hope that the division heads will narrow the recommendations for their purview, and then work with their constituencies in a consensus-based process to make the inevitable hard decisions. Dean Mosby added that it was very important to her to have the committees involved in this process, as much of the decision-making will fall to them, and expressed her appreciation for their participation. Professor Harper said that the faculty committees will not be ceding their decision-making power, and that Associate Professor Nick Junkerman has been emphasizing that as well.
A faculty member asked if the work of the Operations Group will be implemented through shared governance, or through Finance and Administration alone. Professor Harper said that IPPC will be the avenue for shared governance to participate in that work and those decisions.
A faculty member asked why Operations and Academic Portfolio groups are separate, as the outcomes with regard to operations will directly affect the ability of the faculty to perform their job functions. Professor Harper reiterated that IPPC will be participating in the discussions and decision-making process of operations. VP Konstalid added that faculty members are very involved in operations through IPPC, including faculty members who sit on academic-focused committees. The reason for the split is that the Academic Portfolio work ought to sit wholly within Academic Affairs, as the faculty are responsible for those decisions and processes.
A faculty member who is participating in the Academic Portfolio Leadership Group sessions with Huron asked their colleagues to please send along any and all questions to the faculty members participating, as they would like to represent the faculty as fully as possible. There were no further questions.
ADMISSIONS REPORT
Dean Mosby invited Jess Ricker, VP of Admissions and Enrollment to the podium to report out to the faculty with an update on this year鈥檚 enrollment progress. While many of our peers started January with a 5-10% decline in applications, VP Ricker was able to share some positive news:
We're tracking toward our second-largest applicant pool in history, with particularly strong growth among domestic students, who make up the majority of our enrolling class each year. This didn't happen by accident 鈥� beyond our typical recruitment cycle, which this year included over 500 in-person travel events across the globe as well as our traditional on-campus offerings, my team executed an intensive January recruitment campaign including 49 communication streams that involved in 1.5 million outbound emails and we responded to 4,500 inbound emails; we engaged with over 3,000 students at 10 virtual events. Additional events will continue in February. The feedback has been remarkable, including one parent who called our recent faculty panel on Tuesday night 'the best college admissions session' they'd ever attended. They loved the enthusiasm of the faculty, saying, 鈥淢y daughter would thrive in this environment. Who wouldn鈥檛?鈥�
Looking at our two Early Decision rounds, we've secured 52% of the Class of 2029, putting us ahead of where we were at this time last year, both in number of students and financial metrics. We're actually running under budget on financial aid expenditure, which gives us more flexibility as we shape the remainder of the class.
VP Ricker took a moment to acknowledge the financial landscape we're navigating. With total costs approaching $90,000 a year for tuition, room, board, and fees, we're seeing more families applying for aid than ever before - a trend consistent across our peer institutions. The family that could afford 68,000 per year a decade ago is now applying for and qualifying for need-based aid. This shift is particularly evident in our regular decision pool, where we're seeing fewer full-pay applications than in previous years. I shared a slide with this upward trend line in applications for aid at the Faculty and Staff meetings last February, and want to reiterate that we're being strategic and thoughtful in balancing our commitment to access with our revenue goals.
While the size of the applicant pool and our progress so far in Early Decision are promising, we still have significant work ahead as we review more than 11,000 regular decision applications and then engage with admitted students this spring. Your continued partnership, especially those who've volunteered to support our outreach efforts via the form that director of admission Janessa Dunn sent out before winter break, is crucial to our success. VP Ricker closed with an expression of appreciation for the support of the faculty, which she said has a significant impact on the work of her office. VP Ricker then invited questions from the faculty.
A faculty member asked how this year鈥檚 enrollment compares to that of two years ago. VP Ricker said that there was a similar rate of early admits, and that filling so much of the class with early admission helps in terms of both financial planning and creating flexibility when it comes time for regular admissions.
A faculty member asked for clarification on the term 鈥渃ommunication stream,鈥� and whether or not the 39 communication streams described by VP Ricker represent a change in our approach to recruitment. She said that yes, we are doing more, and we doing it a little bit differently. She explained that many potential students or applicants do not come in to contact with materials from Skidmore until they have already applied. Admissions is seeking to begin contact with those individuals ahead of application, but also to continue reaching out in the time between application and decision to influence those potential students to choose Skidmore. There were no further questions.
DEAN OF THE FACULTY AND VICE PRESIDENT FOR ACADEMIC AFFAIRS鈥� REPORT
Dean Mosby opened her report with a commitment to greater clarity in communications on inclement weather days. She continued on with an update on the Middle States reaffirmation of accreditation process. As that work continues, the Middle States working groups have been actively engaged in gathering evidence and assessing the alignment of Skidmore's policies, programs, and practices with Middle States standards.
One of the positive outcomes reported by the co-chairs is new connections being formed across divisions and departments through this process, which are facilitating deeper understanding of the college as a whole, respect for each other's work, and also opening up possibilities for new collaborations. As we look ahead to the work that is happening this spring, the working groups will continue working and thinking through their lines of inquiry that will be mapped onto the standards for accreditation, and also crafting an outline of how Skidmore meets the Middle State standards that will serve as the basis for our self-study that Professor Kelly Shepherd and Institutional Effectiveness Specialist Amy Tweedy will be writing over the summer.
The draft will be shared with the President鈥檚 Cabinet, the working group Co-chairs, Working Group Committee members, and then the community for feedback in the fall. The steering committee and the working groups had a midpoint check-in to talk about next steps and review the timeline for the Middle States process. Our Board of Trustees liaison, Barbara Kahn Muller, joined the steering committee in December and we are working to provide her with an update for the Upcoming Board meeting later on this month.
Dean Mosby then provided an update on the non-tenure track union negotiations. She said that the College and the Union have made significant progress on negotiating the first contract for the Union, with the Union representing non-tenure track faculty. The Union presented their first non-economic proposals in April 2023. Almost 2 years into the process of negotiating, the College and the Union have reached agreements on 23 articles of the new CBA; including management rights, Union rights and business, academic freedoms and rights, Union security and dues, no strike-no lockout, health and safety, grievance procedures, discipline and discharge, institutional support, non-discrimination and equal employment opportunities, and inclusion in and service to the academic community.
At the November meeting Sarah presented in detail the tentative agreements that have been reached on these items, and since then we have reached tentative agreements with the Union on additional significant articles such as evaluations and observations, observations, evaluations, and promotions, and professional development and benefits.
Dean Mosby noted that over the past few weeks we've made significant progress in finalizing a few of the outstanding items. The way the contract is shaping up, we will have 3 instead of 2 ranks for the non-tenure track faculty, we will still have terminal contracts for truly short-term needs: replacements for Sabbaticals and other leaves of absence, retirements, and unexpected enrollment trends, and we can continue to work with the Union about the cap on how many years terminal contracts will last. That's an outstanding item that we hope to resolve in the coming days. The college and the Union have agreed to a 3rd tier promotion for non-tenure track faculty, and the college has worked with the Union to determine which tier each individual non-tenure track faculty member will likely be. At the conclusion of our negotiations we have signed a tentative agreement on benefits which maintains current benefits and improves faculty leave policy so that it will be more equitable for individuals who give birth late in the semester or over the summer.
The Dean said that the College鈥檚 bargaining team will also be recommending to FEC that these changes be incorporated into the faculty handbook, and extended to all faculty members. We have tentatively agreed to provide both full- and part-time bargaining unit members with professional development funds in a manner that closely aligns with current practice, but with consistency across all departments. While we do not have a tentative agreement on this item, the parties are largely agreed with respect to compensation. Our goal is to negotiate these few outstanding items and arrive at a tentative agreement with the Union over the next week. We are very close in this process, and both sides are very eager to get an agreement into place. We understand that educating our community, particularly our department chairs and program directors will be essential to the implementation of the new CBA. And so, to that end, Sarah Vero is working to schedule weekly Zoom Meetings with chairs and program directors which will be recorded for those who are unable to attend in person or attend on zoom.
Dean Mosby closed her report by recognizing some recent accomplishments among the faculty. Kieron Sargeant, Assistant Professor of Dance, recently published a piece called 鈥淎ccenting Dance: a Pedagogical Approach to Caribbean Dance,鈥� which prominently features his work with students in his classes here at Skidmore. She thanked colleagues in Arts Administration and the Office of Special Programs for the fantastic McCormack Residency with Aaron Dworkin. She also expressed her thanks to faculty members who have volunteered to participate in a faculty panel for the upcoming Board of Trustees meeting. So I'd like to thank Erica Bastress-Dukehart in History, Eunice Ferreira in Theater, Matt Lucas in Management & Business, and Lucy Oremland in Mathematics & Statistics, who agreed to participate in the panel. The Board's Academic Affairs Committee is very interested in hearing about some of the innovative pedagogical approaches that faculty are using in the classroom and learning how student expectations have changed, as we look towards finalizing our Strategic Plan and also launching a capital campaign. Dean Mosby shared that she believes it is important to get faculty in front of the Board, so that they in turn will be able to share the good news of what's happening in the Skidmore classroom, which hopefully will translate into resources to enhance faculty development.
Dean Mosby then invited questions from the assembled faculty.
A faculty member identified himself as a member of the Non-Tenure Track Union Negotiating Committee, and expressed that he is glad to hear that the Dean anticipates agreement on the first CBA in the next week. He noted that the Union had tried to schedule negotiating sessions for the current week, but were unable to get confirmation from the Administration. He emphasized the Union鈥檚 eagerness to continue negotiations and complete the collective bargaining agreement. He said that there are outstanding matters to do with compensation, professional development, appointment assignments, academic ranks, valuations, and the actual duration of the contract. Dean Mosby agreed that there鈥檚 a great deal of work left to do, and that the Administration looks forward to returning to the bargaining table.
There being no further questions, Dean Mosby closed her report.
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Dean Mosby called for a Committee of the Whole. When it had come to an end, she invited President Conner to give his report to the faculty.
PRESIDENT鈥橲 REPORT
President Marc C. Conner opened his remarks with an update on the strategic planning process. He noted that, in a time of increasing headwinds, having clarity on institutional priorities and values is key. The Strategic Plan has not changed in response to the current political climate, though the current environment is noted in the opening page of the plan. The plan is now in its 4th iteration and is a complete draft. It was shared this past Tuesday (link here), and there will be myriad opportunities to provide feedback in the coming weeks. After feedback is taken into account and the draft revised, it will be shared with the Board of Trustees in mid-February. The Board Meeting in February will yield another revision, which will again be shared with the Skidmore Community. A final draft will be ratified by the Board at their May meeting. The plan is both aspirational and realistic; President Conner emphasized that he does have aspirations for Skidmore, and that the College deserves to lean into ambitions for its future. His goal for the plan is that its aims are stretches but still attainable. The foundations of the plan are not in an order of priority, but that he is open to writing an executive summary that pulls some of them out in front. Feedback on this is very welcome.
President Conner thanked Professors David Cohen, Tim Harper, Nick Junkerman and Mark Youndt for their collaborative work to bring transparency to where we鈥檙e at and what we鈥檙e doing. The plan鈥檚 implementation will remain consistent with our commitment to shared governance. The upcoming capital campaign will be shaped around the values, priorities, and goals outlined in the Strategic Plan. He noted that we are in a high-pressure time in higher education, and it is in that context that we are working to put together a clear statement of who we are and where we鈥檙e going. President Conner then invited questions from the faculty on the Strategic Planning process.
A faculty member asked about the outcome of the white papers submitted in the fall semester, noting that some items from a white paper he submitted had made it into the current draft of the plan. President Conner said that all white paper authors have been asked whether their work can be made available to the campus community, and that they should be available in the coming weeks online.
A faculty member asked about the influence of the Huron Consulting work on the Strategic Plan. President Conner said that he doesn鈥檛 anticipate that the work with Huron will change our overarching priorities, principles and goals. He noted that the Strategic Plan is more visionary, and the Huron Group work more operational in character.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:08pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Nora E. Graubard
Senior Administrative Coordinator