FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
	Sheri Layral
	312 Signers' Hall
	474-7964   FYSENAT


A G E N D A UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #66 Monday, October 14, 1996 1:30 p.m. - 3:40 p.m. Wood Center Ballroom
1:30 I Call to Order - Don Lynch 5 Min. A. Roll Call B. Approval of Minutes to Meeting #65 C. Adoption of Agenda 1:35 II Status of Chancellor's Office Actions 5 Min. A. Motions Approved: none B. Motions Pending: 1. Motion to approve the AAS in Apprenticeship Technology. 2. Motion to reaffirm the Senateıs position on non-discrimination in the workplace. 1:40 III Guest Speakers - David Guttenberg & Gary Wilken 10 Min. 1:50 IV Remarks by Chancellor J. Wadlow 10 Min. Remarks by Provost J. Keating 5 Min. Questions 5 Min. 2:10 V Governance Reports A. ASUAF - C. Wheeler 5 Min. B. Staff Council - R. Pierce 5 Min. C. President's Comments - D. Lynch 5 Min. D. President-Electıs Comments - J. Craven 5 Min. (Handout) 2:30 VI Public Comments/Questions 5 Min. ***BREAK*** 15 Min. 2:50 VII New Business A. Motion to amend the Associate of Arts 5 Min. requirements (Attachment 66/1), submitted by Curricular Affairs 2:55 VIII Committee Reports 30 Min. A. Curricular Affairs - Maynard Perkins B. Faculty Affairs - Dave Spell C. Graduate Curricular Affairs - Mark Tumeo (Attachment 66/2) D. Scholarly Activities - E. CNCSHDR - Rudy Krejci F. Developmental Studies - Ron Illingworth (Attachment 66/3) G. Faculty Appeals & Oversight - Diane Bischak H. Faculty Development, Assessment & Improvement - Rich Seifert (Attachment 66/4) I. Graduate School Advisory Committee - Peggy Shumaker J. Legislative & Fiscal Affairs - Michael Jennings K. Service Committee - Kara Nance L. University-Wide Promotion/Tenure - John Keller 3:25 IX Discussion Items 10 Min. 3:35 X Members' Comments/Questions 5 Min. 3:40 XI Adjournment ********************* ATTACHMENT 66/1 UAF FACULTY SENATE #66 OCTOBER 14, 1996 SUBMITTED BY CURRICULAR AFFAIRS MOTION ======= The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend the Associate of Arts Requirements in the following way: To allow three semester-length courses (9 credits) in American Sign Language taken at the university level to be substituted for one of the required humanities and social science core courses, and the three-credit humanities or social science elective. Effective: Fall 1996 Rationale: During the 1995-96 year, the Faculty Senate approved the use of three semester-length courses (9 credits) in American Sign Language to substitute for two courses in the Perspectives on the Human Condition section of the baccalaureate core curriculum. At the time this was presented and approved, no consideration was given to the associate of arts degree requirements. The humanities and social science requirements for the associate of arts degree are identical to the baccalaureate core ³Perspectives on the Human Condition² area with the exception that 3 credits of humanities or social science electives are required instead of Phil. 3232X/PS 300X. This motion meets the intent of the Faculty Senate to facilitate the movement of associate of arts students into baccalaureate degree programs. ********************* ATTACHMENT 66/2 UAF FACULTY SENATE #66 OCTOBER 14, 1996 SUBMITTED BY GRADUATE CURRICULAR AFFAIRS Graduate Curricular Affairs Committee Report - Mark Tumeo, Chair The Graduate Curricular Affairs Committee (GCAC) met on September 30, 1996 at noon in the Chancellor's conference room. Old Business Committee Membership: Committee Member Craig Gerlach notified the Chair that he has resigned from the Faculty Senate. We will notify Sheri in the Governance office of the need for a replacement. GEOS 662 Course Description: In the last meeting, a question was raised about whether or not the course description for GEOS 662 had been changed without proper approval. The description in the catalogue HAS NOT been changed. New Business Approval of Trial Courses: Two trial courses were considered for approval by the Committee a) BIOL 694, Ecological Modeling b) BA 694, Basic and Advanced Techniques of Meta-Analysis There where no apparent conflicts found between BIOL 694 and modeling courses in Math and Environmental Engineering. No other discussion of the trial courses ensued. Motion: That the two trial courses be approved, pending no formal objections being received in the Faculty Governance Office by 5 pm, Friday October 4. (Moved by Kelly, Seconded by Nance). Motion passed without objection. Joint Degree and Interdisciplinary Degree Program: There was continuing discussion of how joint graduate degrees are being offered between UAA and UAF. The program guidelines developed by Mathematics were discussed as a potential model for such degrees on the Master's level. This issue will be of continuing discussion in the Committee to determine whether guidelines/policy is needed. This issue is also being discussed in the GSAC, and we decided to let them take the lead on this issue at this time. Thesis versus Project Master's Degree: It was brought to the Committee's attention that there had been a change in the catalogue with respect to the requirement for oral defense of projects without there being any official policy change. This was apparently an editorial change made by Dean Kan. The committee directed the chair to write a letter to Dean Kan indicating that the policy has not changed, and that currently there are instances when a project may not be required to have a formal defense. However, the Committee would like to review this policy, and further, is going to extend the discussion into the differences between projects and theses, in an effort to develop clear policy guidelines for these two approaches to the Master's program. This will be a continuing focus of the Committee in the next meeting. Each Committee member was tasked to discuss this subject with faculty and students, and report back on the distinction between theses and projects in various programs across campus. Meeting adjourned at 1:00 pm. ********************* ATTACHMENT 66/3 UAF FACULTY SENATE #66 OCTOBER 14, 1996 SUBMITTED BY DEVELOPMENTAL STUDIES Developmental Studies Committee Report - Ron Illingworth, Chair The Developmental Studies Committee held an audioconference meeting on 1 October to discuss several issues. 1. Student Placement Tests a. ACT has representatives here in Fairbanks today (Oct 14th) to demonstrate their computerized placement testing program COMPASS. This program is being evaluated as a possible supplement to the ASSET test, a paper and pencil format test. This demonstration is ongoing in the Fairbanks Campusıs Advising Center. b. A computerized testing program would allow the student and his or her advisor to access the program from the advisorıs office or from numerous other locations throughout UAF and its rural campuses. Processing time would be reduced. A writing sample would still be required, however. 2. As a result of a reorganization initiative within CRA, the DEV committee is recommending a bylaw change which will give voting voice to the Student Support Services Project of the Fairbanks Campus. 3. The DEV committee voted to strongly support continued use of the NB grade. The NB grade was a community college grade option which was brought into UAF during restructuring. It first appeared as a University grade option in the UAF 1989-1990 catalog but was present in community college catalogs for several years before this. If inappropriate applications of the NB grade exist, these should be handled on a case by case basis. There may be a need to further clarify the NB grade application guidelines. ********************* ATTACHMENT 66/4 UAF FACULTY SENATE #66 OCTOBER 14, 1996 SUBMITTED BY FACULTY DEVELOPMENT, ASSESSMENT & IMPROVEMENT Committee Minutes and Report Faculty Development, Assessment & Improvement - Rich Seifert, Chair Members Present: David Porter, Richard Seifert, Chair, Linda Curda, Tom Robinson, Senate President Don Lynch, and Wendy Croskrey The meeting was commenced on time 2:15 pm, October 2nd. The first guest was Debra Damron of the UAF Public Relations Office. Debra was invited to come to our meeting to give us a perspective on the idea of holding faculty seminars. She made us aware of already existing options in which her office participated as prototypes for such events. One such was the Provost's Convocation presentation. Most faculty perhaps are unaware (most of our Committee was at least) that we also have a book put out by Karen Cedzo's office, the University Relations and Institutional Advancement Office, called UAF Experts. This book is a resource list that can be drawn on whenever expert information is needed, or when a speaker is wanted on a specific subject. This is annually reviewed and I have a copy now of the 1996 edition. A 1997 edition will be produced and distributed shortly. Another example of faculty seminars which are successful in getting good public reviews are the Science for Everyone Seminars created by the Geophysical Institute and given at the Wien Library in Fairbanks. These have now been extended to Anchorage and even Bethel. Debra related her experience with the radio spots entitled "Arctic Science Journeys", one of which was just on the radio this morning. It was decided after a long and animated conversation regarding the options of how to proceed with the faculty seminar idea, that Chairman Rich Seifert and Debbie Damron would contact Ray Barnhardt, who is a recently returned Fulbright sabbatical recipient who has already expressed some willingness to talk about his experience. We shall try this as a half hour radio show interview which could be broadcast and sent all over the state as a faculty seminar, easily accessible to the community by radio. This is only one of several media options we are looking at but it is a first attempt to get "our feet wet" in this area. Secondly, we had a visit from Dr. Jim Ratcliff of Penn State University. Don Lynch posed to Dr. Ratcliff the question as to what are the major tenets he would recommended in a faculty development policy. Our committee has been charged with developing some sort of faculty development policy, a policy which we have never had before as a faculty. This is likely to become increasingly more important as technological developments occur which faculty must take advantage of and become skillful with. Dr. Ratcliff recommended six tenets of a policy or of policy issues which he thought we should consider. 1. First of all that we examine the factors of faculty development at an undergraduate level context. We need a sustained development program over a long period of time with clearly articulated priorities. The opposite of this, a short term burst of quick development workshops with no clear priorities or long term commitment is often not successful. 2. We need to make a clear and tangible tie between the direction UAF wishes to go and the faculty development needed to get there. 3. Don't go into the effort undercapitalized. Dr. Ratcliff was very specific in intending that undercapitalized means not only not having enough money, but not having enough of the capital that faculty brings to the table. That is, time and effort spent developing various technologies or programs. 4. Look at a design team approach. Get buy in by several key people who are identified as early adopters of programmatic material or technology to utilize in course work and educational delivery. 5. Dr. Ratcliff pointed out something that we need to at least keep in mind. He phrased it in a five word phrase: accolades work better than money. If people are recognized appropriately and in a timely fashion and regularly for work well done, that's often much more crucial than financial rewards. Not to say that financial rewards aren't important, but people need to be recognized with accolades for having done a good job. Finally, although I had mentioned the prospect of talking more about unionization and what role the Faculty Development Committee would have in serving informational needs and stimulating discussion on the division of labor and duties between the faculty governance and the union, we did not have time to deal with adequately in this meeting.