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

For Audioconferencing:  Bridge #:  1-800-910-9680
				Anchorage:  561-9680

A G E N D A
UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #70
Monday, March 10, 199
1:30 p.m. - 4:15 p.m.
Wood Center Ballroom

1:30	I	Call to Order - Don Lynch			  5 Min.
		A.	Roll Call
		B.	Approval of Minutes to Meeting #69
		C.	Adoption of Agenda

1:35	II	Status of Chancellor's Office Actions		  5 Min.
		A.	Motions Approved:
		1.	Motion to amend the Transfer of Credit 
			Policy.
		2.	Motion to approve the Core Review Committee 
			recommendation that courses considered for 
			CORE designation must include a plan for its 
			effectiveness evaluation.
		3.	Motion to amend the Policy on approval of
			academic changes to include a spring review 
			cycle.
		4.	Motion to amend Section 3 (Article V:  
			Committees) of the Bylaws.
		B.	Motions Pending:  none
		1.	Motion to amend the UAF Regulations for the 
			Evaluation of Faculty, Article IV.B.2.

1:40	III	A.	Remarks by Chancellor J. Wadlow  	15 Min.
		B.	Remarks by Provost J. Keating		15 Min.

2:10	IV	Governance Reports
	A.	ASUAF - C. Wheeler				 5 Min.
	B.	Staff Council -P. Long  	 		 5 Min.
	C.	President's Report - D. Lynch 			 5 Min.
			(Attachment 70/1)
	D.	President-Electıs Comments - J. Craven 		 5 Min.
			(Attachment 70/2)
	E.	System Governance Council - M. Scholle  	 5 Min.

2:35	V	Public Comments/Questions 			 5 Min.

2:40		***BREAK***					 10 Min.

2:50	VI	New Business
	A.	Motion to amend the Evaluation of Educational     5 Min.
		Effectiveness policy (Attachment 70/3),
		submitted by Curricular Affairs
	B.	Motion to amend Section 3 (ARTICLE V: 		  5 Min.
		Committees, Permanent) of the Bylaws 
		(Attachment 70/4), submitted by Curricular 
		Affairs
	C.	Motion to amend Section 3 (ARTICLE V: 		  5 Min.
		Committees, Permanent) of the Bylaws 
		(Attachment 70/5), submitted by Core Review
	D.	Motion to include a statement on Course 	  5 Min.
		Prerequisites in the new class schedule and in 
		the Catalog (Attachment 70/6), submitted by 
		Curricular Affairs
	E.	Motion to approve the M.S. & Ph.D. in 		 10 Min.
		Environmental Chemistry (Attachment 70/7), 
		submitted by Graduate Curricular Affairs
	F.	Motion to amend the UAF Regulations for the 	  5 Min.
		Evaluation of Faculty, IV.B.3.d.  (Attachment 70/8), 
		submitted by University-wide Promotion & Tenure 
		Committee
	G.	Nominations for President-Elect			 10 Min.

3:35	VII	Committee Reports 				 30 Min.
	A.	Curricular Affairs - Maynard Perkins 
			(Attachment 70/9)
	B.	Faculty Affairs & Scholarly Activities - Ray Gavlak
			(Attachment 70/10)
	C.	Graduate Curricular Affairs - Mark Tumeo
			(Attachment 70/11)
	D.	CNCSHDR - Rudy Krejci
	E.	Developmental Studies - Ron Illingworth
	F.	Faculty Appeals & Oversight - Diane Bischak
	G.	Faculty Development, Assessment & Improvement - 
			Rich Seifert
	H.	Graduate School Advisory Committee - Susan Hendricks
	I.	Legislative & Fiscal Affairs - Michael Jennings
	J.	Service Committee - Kara Nance
	K.	University-Wide Promotion/Tenure - John Keller 

4:05	VIII	Discussion Items						  5 Min.

4:10	IX	Members' Comments/Questions			  5 Min.

4:15	X	Adjournment


********************
ATTACHMENT 70/1
UAF FACULTY SENATE #70
MARCH 10, 1997


REPORT TO THE UAF FACULTY SENATE
Some Highlights of the Faculty Alliance/Regents' Meeting
Juneau, Alaska February 12 - 16, 1997
Donald F. Lynch, President UAF Faculty Senate

All governance leaders met on the afternoon of February 12th to 
discuss a common position on the University budget. There followed 
a long discussion with Andy Kline, the governor's representative for 
advanced communications technology.  There are two new television 
channels, 3 and 4, which can be used for educational purposes with 
improved technologies.  Sheri Tabor of the UALC indicated that 
Channel 3 broadens the possibilities for educational programs.  
There is to be a workshop on February 21 regarding WEB based 
instruction.  UALC has raised the question of how preparing a 
distance delivery course, e.g. on CD Rom, is to be counted towards 
promotion and tenure.

The Faculty Alliance meeting accepted the resignation of Phil 
Slattery as its chair.  Phil is retiring 1 March 97.  John Craven, 
President Elect of the UAF Faculty Senate was elected chair 
effective 1 March.  There was a long discussion of the status of the 
Faculty Alliance's proposal to the President of the University for 
funding to start planning a summer training institute for UAF 
faculty.  The initial institute is to focus on distance delivery 
techniques.  Evidently, the second proposal has been returned for 
further revision, although the Alliance rather thought its proposal 
had satisfied the concerns raised previously and that the requested 
$16,000 seed money would be forthcoming.

Some Highlights of the Regents' Meeting

The Bachelor of Science Degree in Environmental Science at UAS was 
approved.  SALRM, SOM, SME will have a super dean and three 
directors.  The consolidation is to occur perhaps in April.  The new 
General Harassment Policy and the revised Sexual Harassment Policy 
were discussed with emphasis on the need to understand the 
"context" in which violations might occur.  These are to be approved 
at the April meeting.

After long discussion, it appeared that the Regents wish to institute 
some form of Program - Budget - Performance analysis to evaluate 
the base line budget.  In the past the Regents have apparently been 
primarily concerned with budget increments, but in the April 
meeting's executive session they may consider the relationship 
among performance, budgets, and programs in the baseline budget.  
Evidently there is a sub-committee formed to consider this matter.

	Comment:  The key to this type of analysis is the Performance 
	side of the equation, i.e. what figures of merit are to be used 
	to compare one program with another.

There was a long discussion of student tuition with some small 
increases.  Lower tuition rates were approved for Prince William 
Sound Community College and Kodiak.

Sites other than Fairbanks, Anchorage and Juneau main campuses can 
have tuition rates twenty percent lower than those used on the main 
campuses.

The Regents are to consider what has happened to the one million 
dollars in unallocated money approved for Fiscal Year 1997 at the 
April 16 - 17 meeting.

There were three major social events.  A well attended meeting of 
UAF alumni and local legislators, a large pizza party attended by 
about 60 people including many legislators, and a beautiful evening 
banquet in honor of Regents Forrer and Breeze.

The visits with legislators seemed successful as was the almost 
hour long meeting with the governor.  Our basic theme was that the 
University simply can not stand another budget cut without major 
changes in programs.  The Governor's budget recommends the same 
funding for University as last year with some consolidations on the 
Fairbanks Campus for budgetary purposes.

Representative Eldon Mulder is chair of the house finance 
committee's subcommittee on the University.  His legislative aid 
said they were just starting the learn about the University.  At the 
very least, the legislators and the governor should have learned that 
the student, staff, and faculty governance bodies are working 
together to promote the entire university.

The Classified Employee's Union presented a need for employee 
training.

ACC/AFT presented its version of the deadlock in contract 
negotiations with the University, which was different from the 
University's presentation.  The idea is that a strike will lead to 
binding arbitration assuming mediation fails.  ACC/AFT was asked to 
determine if there is another way besides a strike to get to binding 
arbitration.

United Academics presented its major goals which include 
strengthening faculty governance.

Overall Impression:  Regent Kelly runs an excellent meeting.  Many 
Regents were available for one-on-one conversations after the 
meetings.  We need to start inviting Regents to visit UAF on behalf 
of our Senate.  The search for Performance Indicators is going to be 
a major exercise this next month or so, something the Senate might 
usefully consider.

The numbers we have been given regarding future needs of the 
University for an increase in general funds are probably close to the 
mark.

Every group involved sees a need for internal staff, supervisory and 
faculty training.  All the governance groups worked very well 
together.


	Comments on the Governor's Proposed Budget

The governor proposes the following general fund allocations:
(Numbers rounded: consult budget book for accurate numbers)

			General Fund		Total of All Funds
Statewide  		11.6 million		28.9 million
UAA			60.0			140.0
UAF			82.6			246.8
UAS			13.4			26.8

UAF Main 		59.9			146.1
Bristol Bay 	    	.6			1.1
Chukchi 		.83 			1.5
Interior 		1.03 			1.8
Kuskokwim  	  	2.7   			4.7
Northwest  	 	1.4   			1.9
Rural Col.   	  	2.9   			4.7

Tanana Valley included above
			 2.0     		4.6

UAS 
Juneau			 10.1   		19.7
Ketchikan		 1.5   			2.6
Sitka 		 	 1.8    		4.4

Anchorage
Main Campus		 50.6   		121.7
Homer,
 Kenai		  	 3.4   			6.5
Kodiak		  	 1.8   			2.8
Mat-Su 		  	 2.5     		4.7
PWS   		  	 1.6     		4.4


There are some comments:  Fairbanks Campus clearly has the highest 
performance measures in terms of dollars received per dollar of 
general fund money.  
		: the sites not on main campuses are in fact not all that 
costly in total dollar amounts.  In addition, they raise outside of 
general fund money at least half of their budgets.
		: where the additional seventeen million for Statewide 
originates might be an interesting question to ask.  Perhaps a 
significant portion comes from overhead recovery on Fairbanks 
organized research contracts.  If so, then Fairbanks may be in fact 
subsidizing the entire University of Alaska system, an interesting 
thought.


********************
ATTACHMENT 70/2
UAF FACULTY SENATE #70
MARCH 10, 1997


Report by John Craven,  President Elect and Chair of the 
Administrative Committee


1.  Faculty Alliance proposal for a Faculty Development Institute

We are awaiting a reply from Provost Keating for the SAC.


2.  Student Recruiting

The issue is being worked within the Administrative Committee.


3.  Board of Regents Work on Harassment Issues

The BOR's Human Resources Committee (HRC) again discussed the new 
general and sexual harassment policies at the February meeting and 
they are scheduled to approve the new policies at the April 17-18 
meeting.  It appears to be true that the formal transmission of the 
information from Statewide to the governance groups was not 
followed for the general harassment policy.  However, we do not think 
the BOR will be interested in that as a excuse given that we have 
known about it for some time.  Time is running out for the UA system 
governance groups to comment on these proposed policies.  The 
Alliance has meetings scheduled for March 28th and April 11th, and all 
faculty governance groups will meet twice before the BOR meeting.  
However, everyone will meet only once before our written materials 
must be submitted by about April 1st for the BOR agenda package. This 
which means the faculty governance groups should try to discuss the  
issue and send their results to the System Governance Office by March 
21st.  Additional discussions can be considered at the later governance 
meetings for inclusion in oral statements before the BOR.

There is one issue in particular that needs our attention:  Patty 
Kastelic (Statewide's Executive Director for Human Resources) has 
asked me, as incoming chair of the Faculty Alliance, to seek comments 
by the faculty governance groups on the subject of consensual sexual 
relationships between faculty and students.  The UAF Senate acted on 
this subject in late 1995, but the Alliance has not discussed this issue 
at all and we would like to know the status of this issue with the UAS 
and UAA governance groups.  It is clear that some members of the HRC 
are still grappling with the issues from a perspective far different 
than that contained in the motion passed by the UAF Senate, and Patty 
Kastelic has asked me to aid her in the discussion at the HRC's next 
meeting.  They will be looking for language that directly addresses the 
question of student-faculty relationships where there is control of an 
academic outcome, such as individual classes and graduate student 
committees.  The BOR will do what it wants to on this issue and the 
issue of general harassment, but our serious consideration of the 
BOR's sensitivity on this issue is important.  Patty Kastelic is asking 
our help in crafting language for this policy, so one option for the 
Senate is to simply state that it stands with its existing policy.

The harassment issue has been forwarded to the Faculty and Scholarly 
Affairs Committee for their consideration.


4.  Report on Meeting #34 of the UAF Coordinating Committee

Adjustments to the Calendar

A motion was passed to move the last day for fee payment without 
penalty from September 10th to 12th in the fall '97 semester and from 
January 21st to 23rd in the spring semester.  The motivation for 
moving the fee payment deadline to Friday in the week was to make it 
consistent with the Friday deadline for late registration.  This has 
since been signed by the Chancellor.

Committee Reports

A.  Intercollegiate Athletics - The coaches have on their own altered 
the eligibility requirements for the participation of athletes at UAF.  
As I understand the issue, NCAA requirements are that you must 
maintain a 2.0 cumulative grade point to participate.  This issue was 
before the Governance Coordination Committee last year to make the 
requirements conform with the policy for student aid.  This means, for 
example, that you can continue to participate even if you fail all 
classes in a semester but still maintain a satisfactory GPA.  The UAF 
coaches have raised the bar to require a minimum 1.75 GPA in any 
semester to travel with the team and 1.5 GPA to participate in home 
games.  As a policy this appears praise worthy, but there must be more 
to this.

B.  Academic Computer Users Committee - The motion was made by the 
chair of that committee (M. Jiang) to remove the committee from 
Coordinating Committee and transfer authority to the provost.  This 
discussion was carried out without knowing what the provost's desire 
is with regard to the method of implementation.  A copy of the motion 
will be sent to the governance bodies, but it had not been received by 
the Faculty Senate as of February 28th.

C.  Grievance Council - Its work is continuing, with proceedings in 
progress for 4 individuals: 2 faculty, 1 APT and 1 classified.  The 
workload on this committee is too great, due mostly to contributions 
or demands by legal council for grievant and/or respondent.  This issue 
is in need attention, but is very difficult.

D.  Parking Committee - The rate proposals for next year are being 
considered.  The four motion to be presented for discussion at the next 
meeting are (1) $300, $7/credit hour; (2) freeze at current level; (3) 
freeze for one year then increase $25/year over 4 years; and (4) 
faculty, staff - reduce wages by $200/year and remove parking fee 
plus $5/credit hour to maximum of $70.  That meeting has now been 
held, but I do not yet know what happened.


5.  Faculty Alliance

For those of you new to governance, there is a statewide "equivalent" 
to the UAA and UAF Faculty Senates and the UAS Faculty Council know 
now as the Faculty Alliance (previously known as the Alliance of 
Faculty Senates).  The chair of the Alliance routinely rotates amongst 
the three campuses with the return to UAF scheduled to return to UAF 
this summer.  The present chair, Phil Slattery, of UAS, has taken the 
RIP as of March 1 and I have been elected to complete his term and 
then continue into the following year.  A principle obligation of the 
Alliance is to bring to the attention of the UA president issues of 
importance that affect the three MAUs, some (many) of which are 
before the Board of Regents.  The Fates have placed the harassment 
issue before the Alliance as I begin my service and we are being asked 
for our last comments before the BOR acts.  I ask for your considered 
opinion as a body and anything you wish to contribute in private.  The 
Alliance will work on its formal submission at its meetings of March 
28 and April 11, and we will have a second opportunity to discuss this 
at our April 14th meeting.  It may appear to some that the BOR does 
not care a whit what we think, but it certainly will not care if we do 
not provide the best wise council we can when we are asked


********************
ATTACHMENT 70/3
UAF FACULTY SENATE #70
MARCH 10, 1997
SUBMITTED BY CURRICULAR AFFAIRS COMMITTEE


MOTION
=======

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 
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.


********************
ATTACHMENT 70/4
UAF FACULTY SENATE #70
MARCH 10, 1997
SUBMITTED BY CURRICULAR AFFAIRS COMMITTEE


MOTION
======

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. 


********************
ATTACHMENT 70/5
UAF FACULTY SENATE #70
MARCH 10, 1997
SUBMITTED BY CORE REVIEW COMMITTEE

MOTION
======

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.


********************
ATTACHMENT 70/6
UAF FACULTY SENATE #70
MARCH 10, 1997
SUBMITTED BY CURRICULAR AFFAIRS COMMITTEE


MOTION
=======

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.


********************
ATTACHMENT 70/7
UAF FACULTY SENATE #70
MARCH 10, 1997
SUBMITTED BY GRADUATE CURRICULAR AFFAIRS COMMITTEE


MOTION
=======

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.


********************
ATTACHMENT 70/8
UAF FACULTY SENATE #70
MARCH 10, 1997
SUBMITTED BY UNIVERSITY-WIDE PROMOTION & TENURE COMMITTEE


MOTION
=======

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 (numbers are 
		included in a table at the end of this memo). 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.


			TENURE TRACK FACULTY AT UAF

Counted: Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor, 
Research Assistant Professor, Research Associate Professor, 
Research Professor

Not counted: Instructor, adjunct faculty, Emeriti, Research 
Associate, Staff, Lecturer

Dept     		96-97 Phone Book	96 Senate Reapportionment
CLA       			115  			119
AK Nat Language Center 		5 			5
AK Nat Studies    		2 			2
Anthropology   			9  			7
Cross Cultural Commun  		2  			2
Communication    		4    			4
Geography     			3    			3
Northern Studies   		1   			1
Psychology     			5   			5
Political Science  		5   			5
Journalism-Broadcast 		5  			6
Justice    			2   			2
Library      			11   			15
Linguistics     		1    			0
Military Science       					4
Social work, Studies  		5  			5

Art      			7   			7
English     			18  			16
Foreign Lang & Lit.  		5  			5
History    			6    			6
Music      			11 			11
Philosophy    			4   			4
Theater         		4   			4

School of Education  		19  			20
Physical Ed        					2

CSEM    			145   			117
Biology   			27   			25
Chemistry    			9    			8
Civil Eng       		9    			9
Elect Eng        		7     			7
Geology & Geophysics   		23   			21
GI (research)    		23   			0
Math & Computer Sci    		19   			19
Mechanical Eng    		8    			7
Physics        			18  			19
Inst North Eng   		2   			2

SFOS    			50  			50
Fisheries  			12   			9
FITC         			5   			4
Marine Advisory Prog 		10   			11
Inst Marine Sci   		23  			26

School of Management  		27 			27
Accounting       		7  			7
Business Admin   		12 			12
Economics     			8   			8

SALRM     			25  			21
Forestry      			6 			5
Plant etc Sciences   		14  			5
Resource Management  		5    			5
Palmer             					6

School of Min Eng  		13 			15
Geol Engineering        				3
MIRL       			3  			3
Mining Eng     			4   			3
Pet Devel lab    		2    			2
Petroleum Eng   		4  			4

ACE   				22 			30

College of Rural AK  		24  			29
Bristol Bay      		2  			1
Chukchi        			3   			2
Culinary Arts  			2
Kuskokwim  			10  			12
NW        			5  			6
Interior/Aleutians 		2   			2
Tanana Valley         					6

Grand Total   			442  			428


********************
ATTACHMENT 70/9
UAF FACULTY SENATE #70
MARCH 10, 1997
SUBMITTED BY CURRICULAR AFFAIRS COMMITTEE


Minutes of Curricular Affairs Meeting, February 17, 1997

Meeting Chaired by Maynard Perkins
Minutes by Carol Barnhardt
Submitted by Maynard Perkins, Chair of Curricular Affairs

Attending:  Sukumar Bandopadhyay, Carol Barnhardt, Gayle Gregory, 
Jerry McBeath, Terry McFadden, Wanda Martin, Maynard Perkins, Paul 
Reichardt, Madeline Schatz, Ann Tremarello, Jane Weber

AGENDA ITEMS

1.  RESOLUTION REGARDING PROVOSTS DELETION OF COURSES FROM 
UAF CATALOG

DISCUSSION:  Discussion of the resolution focused on the need to 
make it clear that the resolution is referring to the deletion of 
courses from the PRINTED catalog (i.e. it is still an option to offer 
these courses at some time in the future but they are not listed in 
the catalog).  Jerry amended the resolution to include the word 
printed.  (On a related matter, Ann also pointed out that the Catalog 
will never be up-to-date now that course changes can occur during 
the Spring Semester as well as in the Fall.)

ACTION: 	The following resolution was approved.  One member 
abstained from voting.

Inclusion of courses, certificate and degree programs in the printed 
University catalog, or their deletion, fall under Faculty Senate 
business.  The Senate curricular committees will review courses not 
offered in the previous five-year period and consider whether they 
should be deleted.

	EFFECTIVE:  	IMMEDIATELY

	RATIONALE: 	Previous actions on the catalog (10/17/86) 
do not establish conclusively that the approval and continued 
offering of courses, including their listing in the University catalog 
or deletion from it, are curricular matters determined by the 
faculty.  The resolution clearly connects the catalog to the 
curriculum approved and regularly reviewed by the Faculty Senate.


2.  REVIEW OF THE EVALUATION OF EDUCATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS 
POLICY

DISCUSSION:  Discussion focused on the rationale for a 3 year report 
cycle (i.e. the summary report prepared by each department chair).  
Jerry pointed out that department heads are selected bi-annually and 
therefore the 3 year policy could catch a new department head in his 
or her first year.  He also pointed out that department heads are not 
compensated and preparing this report would mean a lot of 
additional work.  Paul said that the upper limit of years in the cycle 
would be 5 due to the NW accreditation cycle.  He said that he hoped 
that the report would consist primarily of assembling and analyzing 
information and material that was already available, and therefore 
he anticipated that it would not place a large additional burden on 
department heads.  Jerry recommended changing the review cycle to 
4 years and Paul pointed out that this would need to be staggered.  
Madeline suggested that the motion not be voted on until after there 
had been a determination made by the Union about the 
responsibilities of department heads.  General consensus was that 
this new responsibility should be as least onerous as possible.

ACTION: 	There were two votes: one to amend the amended motion, 
and the second vote was to approve the motion with the changes.  
Maynard will contact Dana Thomas about this recommendation.

(See Attachment 70/3 for motion.)


3.  PROPOSED CHANGE IN BY-LAWS REGARDING CURRICULUM REVIEW 
COMMITTEE.

DISCUSSION:  The Administrative Committee asked that Curricular 
Affairs respond to the proposed change in the by-laws as described 
below.

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.

ACTION: 	There was unanimous approval of this proposed change.


4.  COURSE PREREQUISITES

DISCUSSION:  Ann brought the following statement forward as an 
item for information and requested feedback from the Committee 
(i.e. do we have reason to object? is it clear?). Ann indicated that 
prerequisites will become an even more important issue now 
because of the new option that allows faculty to drop students from 
their classes.  Maynard pointed out that the issue of prerequisites 
will become even more important for distance delivered courses.

ACTION: 	The following statement will be included 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.


5.  MEMO TO DEANS AND DEPARTMENTS CONCERNING RESIDENCY 
CREDITS AND DISTANCE-DELIVERED COURSES

DISCUSSION: Maynard took the draft memo to the UALC meeting in 
January, but was asked to delay sending the memo to deans and 
departments until they could additional information could be 
gathered.  Ann indicated that some decisions would need to be made 
soon because UALC courses will be pulled into BANNER and someone 
needs to determine how the UALC courses will be identified (or not 
identified) on BANNER.  As a related matter, we also discussed 
correspondence courses and how they will be identified on BANNER 
and whether or not the year-long correspondence courses will be 
treated differently.

ACTION: 	Maynard will work with members of the UALC Group to 
develop an appropriate memo, and will send it out to deans and 
departments to get their feedback.


6.  MOTION CONCERNING THE TRANSFER OF CORE CREDITS FROM OTHER 
INSTITUTIONS.

DISCUSSION:  Ann has not yet had the opportunity to work with Jin 
Brown to prepare a motion.


7.  AD HOC COMMITTEE FOR PETITION PROCESS

DISCUSSION:  Members of the ad hoc committee will meet and try to 
prepare a motion that can go forward to the Senate by the second to 
the last meeting of the year.  Members of the committee are: Pat 
Lambert DMS, CNS; Jane Weber, TVC, CA; Diane Preston, Disability 
Students Rep; Jin Brown, CLA; Janice Reynolds, CLA.


8.  DATE FOR LOW GRADE REPORTS IN DRAFT OF 1997-98 UAF 
CALENDAR:

DISCUSSION: Ann indicated that a draft copy of the 1997-98 calendar 
had been prepared, and she pointed out that the date for low grade 
reports for freshman had not been changed even though other 
policies and dates related to grades had been changed (because of 
Faculty Senate action in regard to drop dates, etc.).  Ann asked that 
the Committee discuss and, and if appropriate, make a 
recommendation regarding a change in the date/time for submission 
of low grades.  Discussion focused on the advantages of providing 
students with feedback early enough in the semester to allow them 
to catch up in the class or to drop it with the disadvantages of 
requiring instructors to provide information to students before 
there is adequate time to make an informed judgment on the quality 
of the students work.  Wanda indicated that there is a great deal of 
retention literature that supports the value of new students 
receiving academic feedback early in the semester.

ACTION:  	A motion was made to extend the deadline for Low Grade 
Reports to two weeks later in the semester than the time currently 
established for both Fall and Spring semesters (i.e. later in the 
semester).  The vote was a tie (4 to 4); the motion failed.


The meeting was adjourned at 3:30.


********************
ATTACHMENT 70/10
UAF FACULTY SENATE #70
MARCH 10, 1997
SUBMITTED BY FACULTY & SCHOLARLY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE 


Notes from the Feb 28 Faculty & Scholarly Affairs Committee 
meeting.

In attendence were: P. Fast, M. Jennings, M. Pippenger, H. Nielsen, G. 
Burns Cooper, D. Lynch and by teleconference, R. Gavlak and D. 
Mclean-Nelson.  D. Mclean-Nelson attend only part of the meeting.

Phyllis Fast initially chaired the meeting.

Nominations were take for committee chair.  Ray Gavlak was 
nominated and accepted the nomination.  Nominations were closed.  
Ray Gavlak was elected chair by a unanimous vote.

Proposal of an ethics statement was discussed.

The proposed Regents' Policy changes on Harassment and Sexual 
Harassment were discussed.

Don Lynch noted that the provenience of these proposed changes was 
not provided by statewide administration, which violates previous 
practice.

Mike Jennings made the motion to recommend that the process for 
adoption of these policies be held in abeyance until disussions with 
United Academics regarding the legality of adoption of the proposed 
changes.

Motion passed  4-2.

The next meeting of the Faculty and Scholarly Affairs committee 
will be March 14 at 12:30 pm in the Rasumson Library, Room 341.


********************
ATTACHMENT 70/11
UAF FACULTY SENATE #70
MARCH 10, 1997
SUBMITTED BY GRADUATE CURRICULAR AFFAIRS COMMITTEE


Minutes of the Meeting of the Graduate Curricular Affairs Committee
24 February, 1997

Members Present:  James Beget, Mark Tumeo, Peter Schweitzer, Kara 
Nance, John Kelly, ex-officio Dennis Stephens, ex-officio Gayle 
Gregory, ex-officio Marcus Ortelee,  ex-officio alt Elke Richmond 
(for Joe Kan), ex-officio John Craven

The meeting was called to order at noon in the Chancellor's 
Conference Room.

Guests:  Richard Benner (Chemistry), Larry Duffy (Chemistry), 
Charles Mayer (Electrical Engineering, Judith Kleinfeld (Northern 
Studies)


Item 1:  Course Approvals (20 minutes)

The following courses were approved by the Committee with caveats 
as noted:

o	Atmospheric Science Courses:  Approved pending letters from 
John Morack and Larry Duffy, chairs of the Physics and Chemistry 
Departments, respectively, on how these new courses will be 
offered without requesting additional resources.

o	Environmental Chemistry Program:  Approved pending a copy 
with errors corrected.  This will be forwarded to the full Senate for 
approval, and will require Board of Regents approval before it can be 
enacted.

o 	Drop THR 418/NORS 618 cross listed course:  The request to 
drop a course was approved.

o 	Program Change, Education:  One change with respect to the 
number of credits in practicum (reduced from 6 to 3 credits) was 
approved pending a revised request form with other changes removed 
and errors corrected.

The following course request was denied by the Committee:

o	Add THR 416W/NORS 616 cross listed course:  The request to 
change this course and cross-list was denied pending a clear 
description of how the 600-level offering differs from the 400 level 
offering.


Item 2: Draft Motion on Master's Degree Changes

The committee spend almost an hour discussing the proposed motion.  
Several views were heard from the guests present.  Dr. Kleinfeld 
expressed concern that projects were viewed as somehow less than 
thesis, and brought several example projects to support her claim 
that projects were often just as rigorous as theses.  Dr. Mayer 
expressed concern that the proposed changes in professional degrees 
would reduce student enrollment, and asked if comprehensive exams 
met the motions requirement for a "cap stone" course.  The 
committee indicated that comprehensives would meet this 
requirement.  Via e-mail, several individual expressed concerns or 
questions about the motion.  Music expressed concerns about raising 
the required number of graduate level courses from 24 to 27, saying 
they did not have enough offerings to accomplish this, and would 
loose their master's program if such a change were instituted.  The 
committee discussed using 600 level courses from other disciplines 
to help with such concerns, but there were potential problems with 
prerequisites.

The Committee agreed to continue working on the motion with the 
intent of passing a motion forward at the next meeting.  The Chair 
was directed to meet with the Music Department to determine how 
to best address their concerns.  Dr. Kleinfeld and Dr. Mayer agreed to 
work on draft language to address their concerns.  Dennis Stephens 
indicated he would gather information on a standardized form to 
allow archiving of projects, thereby increasing the visibility of 
these projects as important scholarly works.


Item 3:  New "Open" Registration Policy

The committee discussed this at some length, and decided that any 
concerns regarding non-degree seeking students "holding" places in 
graduate or undergraduate courses under the new policy could best 
be handled by Departmental polices on limits to admissions through 
prerequisites.


Item 4:  Rescheduling Next Meetings

One of our Committee members could make the Noon to 1 pm Monday 
slot we originally set.  It was agreed to move the meetings to 1:30 
to 2:30 on Mondays.  The meeting dates remained the same - the next 
meeting will be Monday, March 31 at 1:30 pm in the Chancellor's 
Conference Room.

The meeting adjourned at 2:00 pm.