At 3:35 p.m. Prof. Shanahan opened the first Council meeting of the fall
semester with a warm welcome to everyone present. She then proceeded to
introduce the members of the 2007-08 Executive Committee of the Council
(ECASC): Professors Owen Astrachan (Computer Science), Leslie Digby (Biological
Anthropology and Anatomy), Peter McIsaac (Germanic Languages and Literature),
David Malone (Education), Linda Burton (Sociology), and Güven Güzeldere
(Philosophy, Psychological and Brain Sciences, and Neurobiology ); and, serving as
Executive Secretary, Dale Randall. She also welcomed the return to the fold of the
remarkable Kathy Peterson (Administrative Assistant), Michele Jones having recently
undertaken other duties. And, finally, she welcomed not only the notable skills of
Mary Jacobs (Administrative Coordinator, Office of the Dean of the Faculty) but also
the attendance of the Council’s former chair, Prof. Lee Baker (Cultural
Anthropology).

      Introductions concluded, Prof. Shanahan proceeded to remind everyone that
after the meeting there would be a welcoming reception in the lobby of Allen
Building; that everyone at every meeting should be sure to sign the attendance sheet
on the table near the entrance to the meeting room; that members should let the
Council know in advance if and when they were unable to attend a meeting; and that
anyone lacking a picture on the membership list was urged to supply one to the
office–the goal being that Council members would learn to know one another more
readily.

      ECACS, she continued, had already met and begun to plan for the academic
year 200708.

      Among other matters, the Council would be resuming the policy of
requesting a few chairs of standing committees to address the Council as a whole.
Helpful reports had been presented to the Council last year by committees dealing
with such varied topics as Study Abroad, Athletics, ROTC, and Admissions, and all in
various ways had been illuminating. Other subjects considered for addressing in
2007-08 included opportunities for cooperation with the Pratt School of Engineering
and for encouraging and enriching faculty-student interaction. The last eighteen
months or so had been worrying and wearying, to say the least, and now the Council
needed to plan for better days.

      This much prologue being concluded, Prof. Shanahan inquired whether the
minutes for the Council’s final meeting of the year 2006-07 might be accepted.

There being no corrections, she declared the April minutes to be read into the

record as written.

      Prof. Shanahan then invited Dean of Arts and Sciences George McLendon to
come forward with his fall address to the Council.

      Wishing Council members a happy new year, Dean McLendon noted that he
had recently read in the Chronicle that fourth years seemed to be a time for reflection.
Now as he began his fourth annual address to the Council he wished to say that,
having arrived at Duke, he was somewhat startled to discover that he was “actually
thrilled to be working with this body.” He was grateful that the Council of Arts and
Sciences was committed to playing a serious role in affairs at Duke. In fact, he
wanted to say that one of the “extraordinary pleasures” he had experienced at Duke
was working with faculty members. He had come to understand something
significant about what makes top scholars choose to come to Duke.

      This afternoon he intended to touch briefly on three themes that made Duke
attractive to scholars: (1) the interdisciplinarity, (2) the impact of choice, and (3) the
integral quality of communities.

      At Duke he had perceived a structural support for promising interplay
between and among disparate fields and schools. Productive interplay between
disciplines happened all the time at Duke–and to a degree that was not at all usual
elsewhere. For example, it was not remarkable for a Duke professor to have
appointments in both radiology and chemistry. Duke currently had “rare attractions”
for incoming faculty. As for impact, the fact was that “the world notices what
happens at Duke.” Not only our faculty but also our alumni excelled in all kinds of
human endeavor, making possible “tangible improvements in our lives.” Discovering
and utilizing knowledge—in all of our fields—was true education. As for the “integral”

factor, Duke enjoyed “multiple communities of engagements.” Quite simply, we were

privileged to have and to utilize communities capable of transcending individual

structures.

      Furthermore, he continued, our singular and most important community here
at Duke was our student community, all of our students being guided and mentored
by our faculty. And our success was dependent on mutual capability, mutual
commitment, and mutual trust and respect. The working of faculty members here
with students was of enormous importance. And he was pleased to know and be able
to say that about half of our students were now involved in some sort of independent
research.

      To be sure, the most recent stretch of eighteen months at Duke had caused
strain and damage, a diminishing of trust, and he urged that everybody here at Duke
be encouraged to participate in the process of healing, to make specific gestures of
good will. A simple example might be seen in a modification of the handling of course
evaluations so as to enable students to make better informed and more effective
course choices. Currently only about twenty per cent of the faculty were sharing such
data, thus fueling some unproductive and unnecessary mistrust among our students.
We need to build—or, perhaps better, rebuild— mutual trust here. To “opt in.” One
great beauty of trust is that trust begets trust.

      Prof. Shanahan thanked Dean McLendon for his thoughtful words, then
invited Prof. Steve Nowicki to come forward and speak in his new capacity as Dean
of Undergraduate Education.

      Dean Nowicki began by thanking the Council for the opportunity to begin
what he hoped would be “a sustained and productive conversation.” He had taught at
Duke for nineteen years, starting as an assistant professor of zoology (working in
evolutionary ecology and animal signaling) and more recently he had been “serving
time” for a while as Dean of the Natural Sciences. He now looked forward to a
rather different role, one that would include working with the Arts and Sciences
Council on optimizing the Duke undergraduate experience. He had no preconceived
agenda, however. In fact, he felt that any agenda for this newly established position
would have to be “created collaboratively.”

      He was going to be thinking, of course, of Duke’s much-discussed CCI
(Campus Culture Initiative), and he was well aware that any success it might have
would be the result of close collaboration with both faculty and students. He himself
took it for granted that Duke had great programs, great fields of study. The job now
was to take some of Duke’s great elements and further improve the Duke
undergraduate experience–not “fix” it. “Duke should embrace and build on the good
that is already uniquely to be found here.”

      Emphasizing diversity certainly would be on his agenda. For one thing, he
believed that we become stronger and better when we celebrate difference. The trick
was to embrace diversity while at the same time acknowledging values and goals that
we shared. In the process, of course, one needed to acknowledge that disagreement
was inevitable. On the other hand, “these terrific undergraduates that we have to
work with need to be brought more consistently and deeply into the conversation.”
All of us at Duke should be aware that we now have here more kinds of voices than
ever before. Some have yet to be heard, and we should be ready to listen.

      Ultimately, he continued, undergraduate education was always the
responsibility of the faculty. And the faculty can do its part best by looking beyond
the classroom and becoming more aware of the whole of the student world. Faculty
members needed to realize that they have a stake in all aspects of the undergraduate
world, and they need also to bring their own individual and thoughtful voices into
conversations involving not only curricular decisions but also co-curricular
priorities.

      Dean Nowicki himself was acutely aware of the difficulties ahead, but he assured the
Council that his own goals were high and he would do everything he could to help
achieve them.

      Thanking Dean Nowicki for his remarks, Prof. Shanahan invited comments
and questions from the Council.

      Prof. David Malone (Education) inquired about the administrative structure of
the new dean’s office in terms of its relationship to the Trinity College academic
deans, Student Affairs, and the provost’s office.

      Dean Nowicki responded that everyone here at Duke lived and worked in
what Provost Peter Lange called a matrix. Dean Nowicki himself would be reporting
to the Provost, and the Provost to the President. Robert Thompson, Dean of Trinity
College, would be involved, as would Larry Moneta in Student Affairs and numerous
others. In short, part of Dean Nowicki’s task would be to bring a good many entities
together. He had already been talking with various people, but things were still in the
process of shaping up.

      Prof. Caroline Bruzelius (Art, Art History, and Visual Studies) observed that
“one of the great opportunities now before us is that we are in a position to express
our thoughts on the shaping of a new Central Campus. It is delightful to think we will
have a role in this.”

      Dean Nowicki agreed that it would be good to have time to step back,
consult, and reflect on the matter of Central Campus. At the moment, working on the
issue of Central Campus had somehow begun to seem “like stepping into a fast-moving
river of jello.” To switch metaphors, “We are still knocking on new doors.”

      Prof. Lee Baker (Cultural Anthropology), with thoughts in mind of the prior
eighteen or so months, remarked that he had not heard anything about the athletic
department. Was it to be a part of the “matrix”?

      Dean Nowicki: Yes, but the matter was extremely complex. Among other
things, considering both coaches and staff, some 150 people in the Department of
Athletics were involved. Did he have a large enough staff to deal with the oncoming
chores? Probably he would need a communications officer of some sort. It was still
too early, however, to know just what would be needed.

      Prof. Sarah Beckwith (English) observed that Duke was in the process of
preparing for accreditation, some of the parameters of which were somewhat
controversial. Might or should that subject be factored into the present discussion?

      Dr. Judith Ruderman (Vice Provost for Academic and Administrative Services) was

asked to respond because, serving as she did as Duke’s liaison to our regional

accrediting body (SACS), she was in charge of the efforts now in process.

      She observed that “assessment” was the buzz word of both the accrediting agencies
and the federal government. Duke University would have to demonstrate that we set
objectives for all our programs, that we evaluate the degree to which those objectives
have been attained, and that we be willing to make changes on the basis of
evaluation. We cannot simply send the message to our students and their parents that
“We are an elite institution and many people want to come here, so just trust us.”
And the last thing we want is for some external agency to dictate to us the exact
assessment measures we must use (for example, a national test of some kind). We
must determine for ourselves what works for Duke.

      Dean Nowicki observed that many factors had to be considered. Some of the
ideas now being entertained would doubtless fall by the wayside. The fact was that
Duke was entering into what would probably prove to be a period of rapid evolution.
All things considered, he would be delighted to come back again to work with the
Council.

      Assistant Dean of Trinity College Caroline Lattimore raised the subject of
community relations. On this score, Duke had already begun to reach a point of
intersection, in fact of interaction. The Duke Engage program had already managed
to mount a number of working components. The participating undergraduates not
only had some experience now. They also had evolved some ideas.

      As the conversation was winding down, Prof. Shanahan thanked everyone for
their welcome presence and participation.

      Prof. James Bonk (Chemistry): Before disbanding should we perhaps
introduce our new deans to the Council?

      Prof. Shanahan: Yes, of course. The position of Prof. Ellen Wittig (Associate
Dean of Trinity College), who would be retiring, was to be taken by Prof. Ingeborg
Walther (Department of Germanic Languages and Literature), and the “new Steve
Nowicki” who had accepted the post of Dean of Natural Sciences was Prof. Alvin
Crumbliss (Chemistry)–who himself had recently served nobly as chair of the Arts and
Sciences Council’s Curriculum Committee.

      The September meeting of the Council was then expeditiously closed at 3:35
p.m., with many of those in attendance proceeding to the promised repast in the lobby
of the Allen Building.

Respectfully submitted.
Dale B. J. Randall
Executive Secretary