--- Forwarded Message from Nina Garrett <[log in to unmask]> ---
>Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2006 15:02:39 -0400
>To: Language Learning and Technology International Information Forum
<[log in to unmask]>
>From: Nina Garrett <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: #8259 LRC Advisory Committees
>In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
>References: <[log in to unmask]>
The Yale Center for Language Study has a much larger mandate than
managing technology resources, so the Language Study Committee I work
with is probably larger and has higher-power administrators on it
than might be typical, but for what it's worth, I'll lay it out.
The Center reports to the Provost, so the committee is also appointed
by the Provost, but I do get a lot of input into the thinking.
* it's always chaired by a full professor, typically (though not
always) from a lang/lit dept
* standing members:
* the Assistant Provost who works with the language departments
* the Associate Dean for Humanities in the Graduate School
* the Deputy Dean of Yale College
* the Associate Director of the MacMillan Center for
International and Area Studies
* the Director of Academic Media and Technology
* myself
* the Center's Director of the Directed Independent Language
Study program, who also runs the Yale Summer Language Institute
* rotating members:
* an Assistant Professor from a lang/lit dept or area studies council
* a senior faculty member from a non-lang/lit dept that
cares a lot about languages (Anthropology, Religious Studies, Med
School, Div School, etc.)
* three Senior Lectors (language faculty)
>Specifically, if those of you with an advisory committee could speak to
>any of the following:
>
>* the mandate of the committee
> to advise the Provost and other administrators on all
matters pertaining to language education at Yale, including e.g.,
whether to hire new faculty in order to institute a new language
program, conduct reviews of language programs (especially relatively
new ones), to review departmental recommendations for promotion of
Senior Lectors to a new higher rank, to iron out wrinkles in the FL
requirement, etc. A few years ago the committee reworked all the
required qualifications for the language teaching ranks (Lector,
Senior Lector, and Senior Lector II) and all the procedures that had
to be followed for appointment, reappointment, promotion, and
termination and submitted these to the Provost.
> to advise me on all kinds of turf issues with departments,
on grant-proposal ideas, and on interactions with other programs,
university committees, professional schools, etc.
> to recommend, and in some cases to undertake, research on
various questions pertaining to language programs.
>* the time frame - frequency of meetings / percentage of
>meetings online vs. f2f /etc.
> every two weeks for 1 1/2 hours -- typically 5-6 times per
semester, once we factor in vacations; all meetings f2f, and I
provide coffee and cookies out of my budget!
>* the resources required - staff, expenses, equipment
> Staff time -- one of my staff comes along to take minutes
and later works those up for me. Sometimes we do demos, but since
the meetings are held in the CLS library/conference room we have all
the equipment there anyway.
>* the powers of the committee - authority and limitations
> Strictly speaking the committee only makes
recommendations to the Provost, but these recommendations are almost
always followed.
>* accountability - reporting lines, to whom, in what form -
>reports, studies, minutes
> The committee formally reports to the Provost with major
recommendations, data-based studies, and language program reviews,
but the Assistant Provost who sits on the committee typically takes
care of less formal recommendations herself. Minutes are sent out to
all committee members, but not to other people. There are very
strict confidentiality rules for standing committees appointed by
Provost or Dean, which are carefully observed.
>* potential membership - who selects, selection criteria
> Typically the Assistant Provost and I toss names
around. We look for the balance of administrators and faculty (and
different faculty ranks) described above, and we try to get as
diverse a selection of languages represented as possible (LCTLs and
CTLs, department-based and area-studies-council-based languages,
languages with majors or without). However, the language faculty are
not supposed to "represent" their particular language but to frame
their opinions broadly from their experience. We try to appoint
people who have been at Yale long enough to have a sense of how the
university works and who have had some meaningful responsibilities in
their own programs, and to avoid appointing habitual complainers or
disrupters!
>* communications process - who should hear about the
>committee, how should information be communicated, etc.
> I'm not sure what you mean by this, or how the question
differs from the "accountability" one.
>* evaluation format - how to measure effectiveness of the committee
> I don't know -- I guess the Provost's Office would let us
know if we weren't being useful. One measure that I appreciate is
that of individual members, who routinely tell me that they rolled
their eyes and grudgingly acceded to the Provost's request -- "yet
another committe" -- but then discovered that meetings are almost
always focused and efficient and really interesting!
Hope this is helpful ...
Best,
Nina
Nina Garrett, Director
Center for Language Study
Yale University
P.O. Box 208349
New Haven, Connecticut 06520-8349
Tel: (203) 432-8196
Fax. (203) 432-4485
[log in to unmask]
http://www.cls.yale.edu
***********************************************
LLTI is a service of IALLT, the International Association for
Language Learning, and The Consortium for Language Teaching and
Learning (http://consortium.dartmouth.edu).
Join IALLT at http://iallt.org.
Otmar Foelsche, LLTI-Editor ([log in to unmask])
***********************************************
|
