Thanks to Megan Gerhardt for designing the posters for M

							                      MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT MEETING MINUTES
                                  205 LAWS HALL

Date: 10/10/2007
Time: 12:00 -1:30 pm
Attending: Bryan Ashenbaum, David Cowan, Chuck Crain, Byron Finch, Megan Gerhardt, Xiaowen
Huang, Jill Kickul, Rocky Newman, Joe Rode, Peter Salzarulo, Kay Snavely (Presiding), David Walsh,
Peng Wang (Recording), Charles Watson, and Mark Wesolowski.
1. Minutes from 9-26-07 Meeting were approved without changes.

2. Teaching Evaluation

Kay Snavely shared the information about last executive committee meeting. Each
department is required to have own teaching evaluation plan. It should include multiple
teaching evaluation approaches, such as students’ evaluation, peer review, teaching
profiles, and etc.

Kay shared the main ideas of FSB course evaluation processes and the expectation:
a) All classes need to be evaluated during the last two weeks of class. b) Faculty
members are required to announce in advance the date of the evaluation. c) Evaluations
will take place at the beginning of class. Students will be given adequate time to respond
to questions in a complete and thoughtful manner. d) The faculty member will not be
present during the evaluation process. e) Someone other than the faculty member will
serve as the facilitator. The facilitator needs to provide instructor ID, course, and section
number, distribute, collect and return the evaluation to appropriate departmental
secretary. A student may serve as the facilitator.

Discussion about the proposed FSB course evaluation processes included:

       A suggestion was made that teaching evaluations may be better implemented at
        the middle of the class or a few minutes into class to make sure that any
        latecomers are included. Administering near the beginning of the class allows
        students sufficient time to finish evaluations write informative comments.
       The spirit of the course evaluation processes should be emphasized more than tiny
        details. The course evaluation processes should avoid becoming bureaucratic and
        rigid.
       Some open-ended questions may be added such as inviting information about
        anything in the circumstance that may influence students’ evaluation.

Kay explained the process by which teaching evaluation information is shared in cross
departmental programs. The teaching evaluations of faculty who have cross departmental
teaching appointments will be viewed by the department chair who will forward
summary evaluation information to supervisors of all the departments or programs in


                                                  1
which the faculty teaches. For example, the MGT department teaches MGT 615 as part
of the Masters of Accountancy program. Summary teaching evaluation information is
shared with the chair of accountancy. The chair forwards summary teaching evaluation
for relevant courses with the FSB Director of the MBA Program and the Honors
Program. Faculty asked questions about 1) whether cross-listed courses teaching
evaluation information is shared and 2) how to evaluate team teachers in one course. Kay
agreed to forward the questions as the FSB Executive Committee further considers how
to share teaching evaluation information.

3. Summer Teaching

Summer teaching issues raised at the Executive Committee include the following: a) the
summer teaching funding model will remain 3% of annual salary unless budget changes
arise. b) Robin Parker, University Counsel, has provided interpretation for FSB summer
session teaching policy and deemed that departments which have summer priority
governance allowing faculty close to retirement to “pull rank” to obtain summer teaching
should remove such language.

4. Clinical Faculty

Kay reported progress on divisional policy for clinical faculty hiring. The university has
approved a limited number of clinical positions which are not tenure track but are
continuing employment lines. The main ideas discussed were:
        We should focus on hiring clinical faculty who have ability to teach multiple
           classes. They should be able to teach other classes in case the course
           originally assigned to them changes or no longer exists.
        Questions were raised regarding whether the hiring of clinical faculty may
           affect the chance for the department to get another tenure-track line.
        Questions were raised regarding whether clinical faculty will have
           departmental affiliation.
Kay will pose those questions to the Dean’s Office.

5. Progress Reports

   Top 25 Pre-proposals
   The management department has submitted two proposals: 1) MGT 302—
   Introduction to Operations and Supply Chain Management; Xiaowen Huang is the
   team leader. 2) MGT 291—Organizational Behavior and Theory; Joe Rode is the
   team leader. The Top 25 Project committee has reviewed and provided positive
   feedback on both proposals but asked the department chair to choose which one to
   implement first. After discussion with both team leaders and area coordinators Byron
   Finch and Josh Schwarz, the consensus was to request that the department be allowed


                                             2
    to submit full proposals for both courses. We are awaiting response from Jerry
    Stonewater who chairs the Top 25 Project review committee.

    Faculty Sedona Records
    The Sedona online records are critically important for two assessments: individual
    faculty annual reports and AACSB FSB accreditation information. At our last
    departmental meeting, Kay proposed that our capable and computer savvy secretary
    April Adams maintain and update online data for purposes of annual reports and
    accreditation. Kay reported the recent progress on the proposal of Sedona records.
    April agreed to maintain faculties’ research performance and teaching evaluation
    data. Faculty should convey to April any scholarly publications as they occur
    throughout the year so that data should be always accurate. Kay and April will
    develop the format and guideline for the reporting of teaching and researching data so
    that it meets annual report requirements as well as AACSB accreditation
    requirements.

    MGT Strategic Plan Implementation
    Student Development Goals
        Thanks to Megan Gerhardt for designing the posters for M & O major
           meeting with students. Josh Schwarz and Megan will host the meeting.
        Congratulations to Megan Gerhardt whose undergraduate research assistant
           is one of the few whose research was funded this year.
    Develop donors/fundraising
       Kay also explained the process of fund-raising from faculty. Faculty who make
       contributions to Miami’s Love and Honor Campaign need to specify the
       preferred recipient of their contributions. With no specific recipient, the
       contribution will be submitted to the general fund and may not have the desired
       impact you may wish. Earmarking contributions for specific programs is
       encouraged.


Announcements
   Congratulations to Megan Gerhardt who was recently elected a member of the
     Executive Committee of the Mid-west Academy of Management.
   President Hodge will meet with the Management Department in next on Oct. 24,
     12-1:00 pm. Faculty may submit to Kay suggestions on meeting agenda.
Other important dates and deadlines:
a) October 12--Dolibois Grant proposals due to Ray Gorman
b) October 15--ARA & FIL applications due to Kay
c) November 12-30--MGT faculty goal-setting meetings
d) November 14—FSB meeting, 4 pm, 113 Laws
e) November 30—FSB party, Marcum Conference Center
g) January 22—General Colin Powell, Andersen Distinguished Lecture (tentative)
h) January 28--Faculty 2007 Annual Reports deadline for data on Sedona

Meeting adjourned at 1:30 pm.




                                                 3