The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #70 on March 10, 1997: MOTION PASSED (unanimous) ============== The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend the Evaluation of Educational Effectiveness policy as indicated below: EFFECTIVE: Upon approval by the Chancellor RATIONALE: The first paragraph of additions offers some protection to students and faculty from the misuse of the outcomes assessment process. The second paragraph provides a means of recognition for involvement in this process. The third and fourth additional paragraphs identify department heads and the core review committee as the responsible parties for preparing outcomes assessment reports, identifies the required committee as the responsible parties for preparing outcomes assessment reports, identifies the required content of those reports, identifies the timing of such required reports, and identifies the housing of these reports. If there is no practical reason for the chairs of each department (or equivalent as identified by the Dean or Director) to prepare a report every 3 years, there is no reason to do it more often than every 4 years. ************************* CAPS = Additions [[ ]] = Deletions
UAF EVALUATION OF EDUCATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS POLICY
In accordance with its mission, the University of Alaska Fairbanks has a continuing responsibility to review and improve performance of its students, faculty, and programs. The UAF therefore establishes the Educational Effectiveness Evaluation to describe the effects of curriculum, instruction, and other institutional programs. The process will be useful for curricular and institutional reform and will be consistent with UA Board of Regents Policy and institutional and specialized accreditation standards. The university shall ensure the academic freedom of the academic community in the development and maintenance of this process. THE DATA GATHERED AND SUMMARIZED AS PART OF THE EDUCATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS EVALUATION PROCESS SHALL NOT BE USED FOR EVALUATING INDIVIDUAL FACULTY. FURTHERMORE, NO STUDENT SHALL BE DENIED GRADUATION BASED SOLELY UPON INFORMATION GATHERED FOR THE EDUCATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS EVALUATION PROCESS. EACH FACULTY MEMBER'S ACTIVITIES IN DEVELOPING AND/OR IMPLEMENTING PROGRAMMATIC AND INSTITUTIONAL EDUCATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS EFFORTS MAY BE SUMMARIZED IN THE INSTRUCTIONAL SECTION OF ANNUAL EVALUATIONS AND PROMOTION AND TENURE FILES. Evaluations shall be conducted with regard to the following: 1) Student Information Students shall be assessed upon entry to the university for purposes of course advising and placement, especially in mathematics and English, and for describing the gender, age, ethnicity, and previous education of students recruited, retained, and graduated over time. 2) Evaluation of the CORE Curriculum Evaluation of the CORE curriculum shall include course assessment embedded within CORE courses as well as the assessment of students within upper division courses, especially oral and writing intensive courses. the assessment of students within upper division courses, especially oral and writing intensive courses. 3) Programmatic assessment Each degree and certificate program shall establish and maintain a student outcomes assessment process useful for curricular reform and consistent with institutional and specialized accreditation standards. 4) Evaluation of Out of Class Learning An important element of a student's overall education is learning that occurs outside of classes. Therefore, an evaluation of activities and student support services will be conducted. The chair of each department (or equivalent as identified by the Dean or Director) shall prepare a report at least every FOUR [[three]] years summarizing the Educational Effectiveness program for each certificate and degree program offered by that department. The report shall include a summary of the following: A. STUDENT OUTCOME GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE PROGRAM, B. THE METHODS AND CRITERIA USED TO EVALUATE WHETHER THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ARE BEING MET, C. A DESCRIPTION OF WHAT INFORMATION IS COLLECTED ANNUALLY, AND D. HOW THE RESULTS OF SUCH INFORMATION ARE BEING USED TO IMPROVE THE CURRICULUM. THE REPORT SHALL BE PRESENTED TO THE DEAN OR DIRECTOR'S OFFICE DURING THE MONTH OF MAY. AT LEAST SOME INFORMATION GATHERING FOR THIS PROCESS SHALL OCCUR ANNUALLY. ONCE AN EDUCATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS EVALUATION PROGRAM HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED FOR THE CORE, THE CORE REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE FACULTY SENATE SHALL PREPARE A REPORT, AT LEAST BIANNUALLY, SUMMARIZING THE EDUCATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS OF THE COMPONENTS OF THE CORE CURRICULUM. THIS REPORT SHALL BE SIMILAR IN CONTENT TO THE REPORT DESCRIBED ABOVE FOR INDIVIDUAL PROGRAMS BUT SHALL PROVIDE A SUMMARY FOR THE COMPONENTS OF THE CORE CURRICULUM. THE COMPONENTS OF THE CORE MAY BE SUMMARIZED IN THE REPORT ON A ROTATIONAL BASIS, BUT AT LEAST SOME INFORMATION SHOULD BE GATHERED ANNUALLY. *************** The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #70 on March 10, 1997: MOTION PASSED (unanimous) ============== The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend Section 3 (ARTICLE V: Committees, Permanent) of the Bylaws as follows: (( )) = Deletion CAPS = Addition 9. THE CURRICULUM REVIEW COMMITTEE EVALUATES PROPOSED SUBSTANTIVE UNDERGRADUATE COURSE AND PROGRAM ADDITIONS, CHANGES, AND DELETIONS SUBMITTED BY THE APPROPRIATE SCHOOL/COLLEGE CURRICULUM COMMITTEES. AMONG THE TOPICS OF ITS REVIEW ARE NUMBER AND DUPLICATION OF COURSES, CREDIT ASSIGNMENT, ESTABLISHMENT OF NEED FOR NEW PROGRAMS, AND RESOURCE IMPACTS OF CURRICULAR CHANGES. DECISIONS OF THE CURRICULUM REVIEW COMMITTEE MAY BE APPEALED TO CURRICULAR AFFAIRS BY THE DEPARTMENT SUBMITTING THE PROPOSAL. THE COMMITTEE SHALL BE COMPOSED OF THE CHAIRS OF THE COLLEGE/SCHOOL CURRICULUM COUNCILS, THE CHAIR OF THE DEVELOPMENTAL STUDIES COMMITTEE, THE UNIVERSITY REGISTRAR OR THE REGISTRAR'S DESIGNEE, AND SHALL BE CHAIRED BY A MEMBER OF CURRICULAR AFFAIRS. EFFECTIVE: Immediately Upon Chancellorıs Approval RATIONALE: The purpose of this proposed change is to delineate the differences between the functions of the college/school curriculum councils and that of the Curriculum Review Committee. The college/school curriculum councils are the sole judge of the substantive content of proposed new courses, programs. The Curriculum Review Committee is responsible for coordinating the proposals to insure against needless duplication, proper assignment of course levels against university-wide criteria, etc. The Core Review Committee is responsible for reviewing and approving courses for inclusion in the Core. There is no reason why a course should go to both the Curriculum Review and Core Review Committees if it is to be included in the Core. The only exception to this might be Written and Oral Intensive Courses. *************** The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #70 on March 10, 1997: MOTION PASSED (unanimous) ============== The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend Section 3 (ARTICLE V: Committees, Permanent) of the Bylaws as follows: (( )) = Deletion CAPS = Addition 10. THE CORE REVIEW COMMITTEE REVIEWS AND APPROVES COURSES SUBMITTED BY THE APPROPRIATE SCHOOL/ COLLEGE CURRICULUM COUNCILS FOR THEIR INCLUSION IN THE CORE CURRICULUM AT UAF. THE CORE REVIEW COMMITTEE COORDINATES AND RECOMMENDS CHANGES TO THE CORE CURRICULUM, DEVELOPS THE PROCESS FOR ASSESSMENT OF THE CORE CURRICULUM, REGULARLY REPORTS ON ASSESSMENT OF THE CORE CURRICULUM, MONITORS TRANSFER GUIDELINES FOR CORE COURSES, ACTS ON PETITIONS FOR CORE CREDIT, AND EVALUATES GUIDELINES IN LIGHT OF THE TOTAL CORE EXPERIENCE. THIS COMMITTEE WILL ALSO REVIEW COURSES FOR ORAL, WRITTEN, AND NATURAL SCIENCE CORE CLASSIFICATION. THE COMMITTEE SHALL BE COMPOSED OF ONE FACULTY FROM THE FOLLOWING CORE COMPONENT AREAS: BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES, BUSINESS/ENGINEERING, ENGLISH, HUMANITIES, MATHEMATICS, NATURAL SCIENCES, AND COMMUNICATION. MEMBERSHIP ON THE COMMITTEE WILL INCLUDE AN UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT. EFFECTIVE: Immediately Upon Chancellor's Approval RATIONALE: The status of the Core Review Committee should be raised to that of a Permanent Committee. The nature and amount of work accomplished regularly by this committee indicates the need for its recognition in the bylaws. *************** The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #70 on March 10, 1997: MOTION PASSED (1 nay) ============== The UAF Faculty Senate moves to include the following statement in the new class schedule and in the Catalog. Course Prerequisites Course prerequisites indicate the previous preparation that a student must have in order to enter a course. An instructor has the right to drop from the course any student not meeting the course prerequisites. Permission of the instructor to enter a class may be granted to a student not meeting prerequisites under special circumstances. EFFECTIVE: Immediately RATIONALE: Prerequisites will become an even more important issue now because of the new option that allows faculty to drop students from their classes. The issue of prerequisites will become even more important for distance delivered courses. *************** The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #70 on March 10, 1997: MOTION PASSED (unanimous) ============== The UAF Faculty Senate moves to approve the M.S. & Ph.D. in Environmental Chemistry. EFFECTIVE: Upon Board of Regentsı Approval RATIONALE: See full program proposal #44 on file in the Governance Office, 312 Signersı Hall. ********************** EXECUTIVE SUMMARY For more than a decade UAF has provided graduate training in environmental chemistry through the Chemistry and Biochemistry Department MS Program and the Interdisciplinary Ph.D. Program. In recent years this activity has expanded substantially because of increasing student demand and the recruitment of new chemistry faculty with environmental research interests. The UAF Chemistry and Biochemistry Department believes that further development of this effort can now be accomplished without commitment of additional resources by providing increased visibility through establishment of a Graduate Program in Environmental Chemistry leading to Ph.D. and MS degrees. The goal of the Graduate Program in Environmental Chemistry will be to train scientists for research, teaching and other professional positions in atmospheric chemistry, environmental chemical measurement, marine chemistry, chemical aspects of global change and related fields with emphasis on northern environments. These skills are in high demand in Alaska and around the world as societies turn away from preoccupations of the cold war era and focus on issues of sustainable development and environmental quality. The Graduate Program in Environmental Chemistry will enhance the educational opportunities at UAF, not only at the graduate level, but also for undergraduates by attracting high quality graduate students, some of whom will become teaching assistants in undergraduate classes. This program will also contribute to UAFıs research focus on the northern environment. In addition, it will expand links between the university and private sector and governmental organizations in Alaska and throughout the north by means of internships and exchanges. *************** The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #70 on March 10, 1997: MOTION PASSED (unanimous) ============== The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend the UAF Regulations for the Evaluation of Faculty: Initial Appointment, Annual Review, Reappointment, Promotion, Tenure, and Sabbatical Leave, IV.B.3.d. as follows: [[ ]] = Deletions CAPS = Additions IV. CONSIDERATION OF FACULTY FOR PROMOTION AND TENURE B. Faculty with Academic Rank 3. d. Constitution and Operation of University-wide Promotion and Tenure Committee. The University-wide Promotion and Tenure committee will be composed of [[one representative from each college or school in existence at the beginning of each academic year.]] TWELVE REPRESENTATIVES: THREE FROM THE COLLEGE OF LIBERAL ARTS (ONE EACH FROM EDUCATION, HUMANITIES, AND SOCIAL SCIENCES); THREE FROM THE COLLEGE OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING, AND MATHEMATICS (ONE FROM EACH AREA); THREE FROM THE COLLEGE OF RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT (ONE EACH FROM THE SCHOOLS OF MANAGEMENT, AGRICULTURE AND LAND RESOURCES MANAGEMENT, AND MINERAL ENGINEERING); AND ONE EACH FROM THE SCHOOL OF FISHERIES AND OCEAN SCIENCES, ALASKA COOPERATIVE EXTENSION, AND COLLEGE OF RURAL ALASKA. EFFECTIVE: Immediately Upon Chancellor's Approval RATIONALE: 1. The current definition of the committee makeup is not consistent with the new "mega-colleges" planned or in existence. The motion essentially maintains the status quo, but adds one representative each in CLA and CSEM. 2. A new definition of the committee makeup must be in place so that timely elections may be held this Spring for next year. 3. Five committee members (CLA-Education, SOM, SFOS, ACE, and SALRM) and five alternates [CLA (2), SOM, SFOS, and SALRM] will return next year. Thus elections would be necessary in CSEM (3 rep and 3 alternates), CLA (2 reps and 1 alternate), SME (rep and alternate), ACE (alternate) and CRA (rep and alternate). 4. During the past several years the overall composition and size of the P/T committee has been satisfactory. The P/T committee traditionally has included representatives from a variety of academic disciplines in order to provide expertise and understanding of the mores and standards within the vastly different disciplines present on this campus. 5. Some consideration, however, should be made for the number of tenure track faculty (assistant, associate, and full professors, or research versions thereof) within the different units and disciplines. We have counted these in two sources: the 95-96 faculty senate reapportionment census and the 96-97 telephone book. They agree closely, with the former source yielding 428 faculty, the latter 442. The difference was essentially due to the (apparent) exclusion of Geophysical Institute research faculty in the former compilation. Two promotion files from that unit were considered by the P/T committee this year, suggesting that these faculty should be counted in any P/T committee representation list. 6. The numbers show that basically CLA and CSEM have been underrepresented on the committee, and that this could be redressed by adding a rep from each college. Logical divisions exist in both colleges: mathematics is a large department that has noticeably different standards and working conditions compared to scientists and engineers, and in CLA there are approximately equal numbers of faculty in humanities and social sciences, again with these two groups having noticeably different scholarly standards and working conditions. 7. Increasing the size of the committee by two members actually would be a good thing. Even with alternates, there is usually one member and sometimes two out for sickness or conflict of interest. This has decreased the actual voting members to 8 in the past, which may be too small. A larger committee will make organizing slightly more difficult, but on the other hand will ease the task of drafting letters. Two more members can easily be accommodated in any of common meeting rooms. *************** The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #70 on March 10, 1997: RESOLUTION =========== WHEREAS, Provost Jack Keating has supported the idea of a Faculty Seminar Series from its inception early this year; and WHEREAS, Dr. Keating responded quickly and appropriately to a request for financial support to provide for a reception following the inaugural and two other faculty seminars, to help start the seminar series on its way; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED That the Faculty Senate recognizes, applauds, and thanks the Provost for his support of the Faculty Seminar Series in keeping with the intent of the series to reach a wide audience and demonstrate to the University and Fairbanks communities, the contribution that faculty make to our community life.