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

For Audioconferencing:  Bridge #:  1-877-751-8001
				Anchorage:  751-8000

A G E N D A UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #86 Monday, March 8, 1999 1:30 p.m. - 3:40 p.m. Wood Center Ballroom
1:30 I Call to Order - Madeline Schatz 5 Min. A. Roll Call B. Approval of Minutes to Meeting #86 C. Adoption of Agenda 1:35 II Status of Chancellor's Office Actions 5 Min. A. Motions Approved: B. Motions Pending: 1. Motion prohibiting faculty from receiving a graduate degree from UAF. 2. Motion to approve the MFA degree program in Art. 3. Motion on status of students in post-baccalaureate teacher licensure programs. 1:40 III A. Remarks by Chancellor J. Wadlow 10 Min. Questions 5 Min. B. Remarks by Provost P. Reichardt 5 Min. Questions 5 Min. C. Guest Speaker: Diane McLean, 10 Min. Intellectual Properties Manager Questions 5 Min. 2:20 IV Governance Reports A. ASUAF - J. Richardson 5 Min. B. Staff Council - B. Frey 5 Min. C. President's Report - M. Schatz 10 Min. (Attachment 86/1) 2:40 V Public Comments/Questions 5 Min. 2:45 ***BREAK*** 10 Min 2:55 VI New Business A. Motion to amend Section 3, (ARTICLE V: 5 Min. Committees), E., PERMANENT, 8. of the Bylaws, submitted by Faculty Appeals & Oversight (Attachment 86/2) B. Motion on graduate transfer credits, 5 Min. Submitted by Graduate & Professional Curricular Affairs (Attachment 86/3) C. Nominations for President-Elect 5 Min. 3:10 VII Committee Reports 20 Min. A. Curricular Affairs - G. McBeath (Attachment 86/4) B. Faculty & Scholarly Affairs - J. Yarie C. Graduate & Professional Curricular Affairs - M. Whalen (Attachment 86/5) D. Core Review - J. Brown (Attachment 86/6) E. Curriculum Review - C. Basham F. Developmental Studies - J. Weber G. Faculty Appeals & Oversight - J. Kelley (Attachment 86/7) H. Faculty Development, Assessment & Improvement - D. Porter (Attachment 86/8) I. Graduate School Advisory Committee - L. Duffy (Attachment 86/9) J. Legislative & Fiscal Affairs - S. Deal K. Service Committee - K. Nance L. Ad Hoc Committees (Attachment 86/10) 3:30 VIII Discussion Items 5 Min. 3:35 IX Members' Comments/Questions 5 Min. 3:40 X Adjournment *************** ATTACHMENT 86/1 UAF FACULTY SENATE #86 MARCH 8, 1999 President's Report - Madeline Schatz Dear Colleagues, The face-to-face Faculty Alliance, Staff Alliance and Coalition of Student Leaders meetings in Juneau were held in conjunction with the Board of Regents' meeting. This gave a great many people access to President Hamilton's presentation to the joint Finance Committees of the Alaska State House of Representatives and the Alaska State Senate--and we turned out in force. Our new charismatic leader was very impressive in his presentation and fielded questions with much aplomb. Times, they are a-changing! I have a few things to say about the changes occurring in our State, our University and on our campus. We have been facing the reality of difficult financial times in this state (since my arrival in 1990--hmmm, I wonder if there's a correlation?) for a very long time. The university has been analyzed, criticized, exorcised, and miniaturized. We have suffered due to the lack of foresight by our legislators. As President Hamilton put it in his presentation: we needed the analysis, we rose to the occasion, we cleaned house and now we're ready for growth. The Retirement Incentive Program has decimated some of our programs and services and has "cleaned house" in others. It is time to focus on the impact of the UA system on the future of the State of Alaska. The UA system has, probably, more impact on the State than any other "industry." We are producing the leaders of tomorrow. Two things trouble me greatly about this institution of higher learning. Many have become extremely cynical (with very good reason!) and many have lost hope. I am here to tell you that help is on its way. This is an exciting turning point in our history. Before venturing into the realm of faculty governance I found myself adopting an "all administrators don't know what they're doing" attitude. I was frustrated and I needed to find a place to focus the blame. Since my service as Faculty Senate president- elect and, now, president, I have had the opportunity to work with these administrators. My mind has been changed drastically. I have served on the Faculty Alliance, which conscientiously lobbied the Board of Regents for faculty input on the search committee to select the new university president. I have served as Chair of the search committee to select the new provost, and I have provided faculty input to President Hamilton on the selection of a new chancellor. I have found that all of our administrators, from the Board of Regents through the president through the chancellor through the provost and deans, have been desirous of faculty input and help. Some accuse me of being "co-opted" by the administration. Those people don't know me very well. What has happened is that I have gained a new respect of what it takes to sit in the seat of an administrator who has to try to save a sinking university system with very little help from the Legislature. We owe a great deal to departing Chancellor Wadlow. I have had the privilege of working with her for two years. She has been dedicated to this campus and has worked tirelessly to keep our ship afloat in very shallow waters. Because she is an extremely private person many have interpreted her personality incorrectly. I will, personally, miss her very much. I credit much of the turn- around from negativity to positivity in advertising to her. We were in the depths and she helped pull us up. We are now in an exciting new era. President Hamilton's presentation to the Legislature infused new energy into our cause. Please, let us not get complacent in our responsibilities to continue our vigilant lobbying of our own legislators. As Chancellor Wadlow put it in her letter to us, it is a period of "new excitement, promise and exhilaration." I felt it in Juneau. It is time for the faculty to band together to promote this new sense of "can do." It's up to us. *************** ATTACHMENT 86/2 UAF FACULTY SENATE #86 MARCH 8, 1999 SUBMITTED BY FACULTY APPEALS & OVERSIGHT MOTION ======= The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend Section 3, (ARTICLE V: Committees), E., PERMANENT, 8. of the Bylaws as follows: [[ ]] = Deletion CAPS = Addition 8. The Faculty Appeals and Oversight Committee shall be composed of two tenured faculty members, elected from each college/school and confirmed by the Faculty Senate. FACULTY APPEALS WILL BE DEALT WITH IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROPRIATE UNION CONTRACT. THE COMMITTEE WILL ACT AS A POOL TO BE DRAWN UPON TO ACT AS THE UNITED ACADEMICS REPRESENTATIVES TO THE APPEALS BOARD. THE CHAIR OF THE FACULTY APPEALS AND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE WILL SELECT, FROM THE COMMITTEE, MEMBERS OF THE UNITED ACADEMICS BARGAINING UNIT WHO WILL SERVE ON THE PARTICULAR APPEALS BOARD. [[A promotion/tenure appeals subcommittee composed of five tenured faculty will hear all promotion and/or tenure reconsideration requests and report its findings to the Chancellor according to University of Alaska Fairbanks Regulations, Section IV,B,4. The subcommittee will be selected by the Chair of the Faculty Appeals and Oversight Committee and will not include faculty from the units in which the requests for reconsideration originated. No two faculty from the same unit, as currently elected to the committee, will be selected for the subcommittee.]] COMMITTEE MEMBERS SHALL CONSTITUTE A HEARING PANEL POOL TO SERVE AS NEEDED ON GRADE APPEALS, AS SPECIFIED IN THE UAF GRADE APPEALS POLICY. [[Committee members shall constitute a hearing panel pool to serve as needed on grievance hearing panels, as specified in Regents' Policy 04.08.08.VI.A. ]] Committee members shall oversee the process of evaluation of academic administrators. [[A non-retention appeals subcommittee composed of five tenured faculty will hear all non-retention reconsideration requests and report its findings to the Chancellor. This subcommittee will conduct business in the same fashion as the promotion/tenure appeals subcommittee, i.e., will review the available documents and made a determination on whether or not appropriate policy and due process was followed.]] Committee members shall review issues dealing with faculty prerogative and make recommendations for policy changes to the Faculty Senate. EFFECTIVE: Immediately RATIONALE: Deletion of the appeals subcommittees are a result of union negotiations and are now reflected in the new union contracts. The changes reflect the need to clarify the committee's role under the United Academic contract, Article 7.34.a. The addition of a hearing panel pool reflects activities of the committee stipulated by the UAF Grade Appeals Policy. *************** ATTACHMENT 86/3 UAF FACULTY SENATE #86 MARCH 8, 1999 SUBMITTED BY GRADUATE & PROFESSIONAL CURRICULAR AFFAIRS MOTION: ======= The UAF Faculty Senate moves that graduate credit will be transferable within the UA system and from any other accredited institution for courses where the student has received a grade of B or better with the following stipulations: up to 1/2 of all graduate degree credits may be transferred with no more than 1/3 of all graduate degree credits transferred from any other accredited institution outside the UA system. For use in a specific graduate program, the student's graduate committee must approve the transfer credit and it must be clearly indicated in the Graduate Study Plan and on the Advancement to Candidacy Form. EFFECTIVE: Immediately RATIONALE: UAF graduate students are currently prevented from transferring more than 9 graduate credits. This motion would change university policy to permit transfer of a higher proportion of graduate degree credits. The stipulations of this policy provide greater flexibility in transferring graduate credits especially from within the UA system. Currently there is no stipulation concerning the grade of graduate credits transferred to UAF. This motion would impose a minimum grade of "B" for all graduate transfer credits. Individual departments could have other standards that permit exclusion of some credit transfers. *************** ATTACHMENT 86/4 UAF FACULTY SENATE #86 MARCH 8, 1999 SUBMITTED BY CURRICULAR AFFAIRS Minutes, Curricular Affairs Committee, 2/16/99 The committee began its meeting at 9:45 a.m., with all members in attendance except Ron Illingworth and Janice Reynolds (Harry Bader has resigned from the committee and the senate). The committee discussed five items: 1. ADVISOR'S SIGNATURE At the request of the Instructional Working Group, the committee discussed whether to recommend to the senate that the advisor's signature no longer be required for students with upper-division standing (more than 60 credit hours completed). Discussion covered these topics: helpfulness of advisors in familiarizing students with changes in degree requirements, checking completion of distribution requirements, etc.; when it might be possible for students to have contact with advisors through the web; frustrations of students unable to locate advisors in some departments; success of other departments in improving advising. The sense of the committee was that the existing requirement is academically justifiable. Only the chair was disposed to eliminate the requirement. No action recommendation will emerge from the committee on this issue this year. 2. TRANSFER CREDITS FROM ILISAGVIK COLLEGE Ann Tremarello apprised the committee of this situation. Until this year, credits from Ilisagvik have been transcripted as UAF credits. Now the College is seeking independent accreditation, and a new Memorandum of Agreement is being forged to cover the transition period. That agreement will have an articulation section. The sense of the committee was that until Ilisagvik is accredited, a MOA should deal with the issue of transferring credits. Ann Tremarello will follow this issue and report to the committee as needed. 3. NEW B.A. DEGREE IN ARTS AND SCIENCES Three members of the committee--Carol Barnhardt, Maynard Perkins, and Ed Murphy--have served on the committee which is preparing a new degree program in the arts and sciences, for students seeking a solid foundation in both the arts and sciences to use as preparation for elementary teaching. They gave the rest of committee members an overview of the new degree requirements, its relationship to the existing B.Ed. degree (scheduled for elimination) and licensure requirements. Questions emerged on the nature of some proposed new courses, and on what body/ department/college would have administrative oversight. 4. HONORS THESIS SCHOLAR OPTION At its last meeting, the committee had asked Roy Bird, director of the Honors Program, to make a proposal concerning departmental honors. The proposal would authorize the honors program to institute an honors thesis scholar option. Applicants would need a cumulative GPA of 3.5 or 3.5 for the semester preceding application. Students would take 12 credit hours in honors courses, and complete an honors thesis (paper, project, performance) for three hours in their senior year. Of the 12 hours of honors courses, a total of 9 might come from honors core offerings. At least 3 of the 12 hours would be accomplished as contract hours. Students completing these requirements would receive an "honors thesis scholar" designation on their diplomas and official transcripts. Committee discussion (in the absence of faculty from the honors program, who were not represented) touched on the availability of honors offerings at rural campuses, the likelihood that transfer students could take advantage of the proposed option, and the effect this would have on departments seeking their own honors designation. The committee thought that the proposal from the honors program did not address the concern with which it began: creation of an honors designation at the departmental level. It did not object to the honors program proposal, but wondered about the sufficiency of need for it. The sense of the committee was that the honors program proposal and the committee's original proposal to the senate, be compared, with a recommendation for action, at the committee's next meeting. 5. PETITION WAIVERS FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES The chair brought this issue back to the committee for discussion and resolution. The issue is whether the newly- approved, simplified petition process accommodates students with disabilities. At its next meeting, the committee will hear from the director of the SDS office, who will make a recommendation. Having finished its business, the committee adjourned at 10:50 a.m., establishing March 23, at 9:45 a.m., as its next meeting data. Submitted by Jerry McBeath. *************** ATTACHMENT 86/5 UAF FACULTY SENATE #86 MARCH 8, 1999 SUBMITTED BY GRADUATE & PROFESSIONAL CURRICULAR AFFAIRS Report of the GPCA Committee Meetings February 5 and 22, 1999 February 5, 1999 Present: Michael Whalen - Chair, Harikumar Sankaran, Clif Lando, Joe Kan, Gayle Gregory, Dennis Stephens, Dennis Shall (visitor Dept. of Ed.), two other visitors from education. The Post-Baccalaureate Teachers Licensure program was reviewed and approved by the committee. February 22, 1999 Present: Michael Whalen - Chair, Elena Conti, Vikas Sonwalkar, Clif Lando, Renee Manfredi, Hilary Fletcher, Dennis Stephens, Ron Gatterdam AGENDA 1. Graduate Petition Process - Ron Gatterdam 2. Graduate Transfer Credit Motion 3. Other issues? 4. Next meeting 1. Ron Gatterdam presented anecdotal information about possible abuses of graduate policy and asked the committee to consider whether a formal graduate petition policy is needed. The committee discussed the issue and determined that we needed more information from the graduation office and the graduate school before we could act on this issue. 2. A motion on graduate transfer credits was sent back to the committee by the Administrative Committee. Changes to that motion were made based on their recommendations and a revised motion was crafted which will be resubmitted to the Administrative Committee. [Deletions], ADDITIONS Motion: THE UAF FACULTY SENATE MOVES THAT graduate credit WILL BE [is] transferable within the UA system and from any other accredited institution for courses where the student has received a grade of B or better WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS: UP TO 1/2 OF ALL GRADUATE DEGREE CREDITS MAY BE TRANSFERRED FROM WITHIN THE UA SYSTEM OR UP TO 1/3 OF ALL GRADUATE DEGREE CREDITS MAY BE TRANSFERRED FROM ANY OTHER ACCREDITED INSTITUTION. For use in a specific graduate program, the student's graduate committee must approve the transfer credit and it must be clearly indicated in the Graduate Study Plan and ON the Advancement to Candidacy Form. Effective: Immediately Rationale: UAF graduate students are currently prevented from transferring more than 9 graduate credits. This motion would change university policy TO PERMIT TRANSFER OF A HIGHER PROPORTION OF GRADUATE DEGREE CREDITS. THE STIPULATIONS OF THIS POLICY PROVIDE GREATER FLEXIBILITY IN TRANSFERRING GRADUATE CREDITS ESPECIALLY FROM WITHIN THE UA SYSTEM. CURRENTLY THERE IS NO STIPULATION CONCERNING THE GRADE OF GRADUATE CREDITS TRANSFERRED TO UAF. THIS MOTION WOULD IMPOSE A MINIMUM GRADE OF "B" FOR ALL GRADUATE TRANSFER CREDITS. [This would bring graduate policy in line with undergraduate policy.] Individual departments could have other standards that permit exclusion of some credit transfers. 3. Other Issues The committee briefly discussed the general Masters Degree Requirement issue and agreed to revisit the issue at an upcoming meeting The committee discussed limits on the number of undergraduate credits that could be applied to graduate programs. Committee members will research this policy at other institutions to determine whether UAF is in line with national trends. 4. Next meeting will be scheduled pending the submission of all graduate course and program changes. *************** ATTACHMENT 86/6 UAF FACULTY SENATE #86 MARCH 8, 1999 SUBMITTED BY CORE REVIEW The CORE Review Committee is currently finishing an update of "The Baccalaureate Experience: CORE Curriculum Requirements" for distribution to the UAF campus this Spring. As members of CORE Review know, we owe credit for most of the real work to Sheri in the Governance Office. Distribution of the revised CORE document will be an opportunity, in conjunction with the Student Learning Outcomes Assessment, for everyone on our campus to review what we intended with the CORE Curriculum and to consider, after the first round of Outcomes Assessment, how the CORE Curriculum is functioning. Other Assessment work in progress: Natural Sciences: First Assessment Report due May 15 Mathematics: First Assessment Report due May 15 Foreign Languages: First Assessment Report due May 15 Late Assessment Reports (Areas not reporting Spring 1998) Political Economy: First Assessment Report due May 15 Sociology: First Assessment Report due May 15 Other Assessment: Coordination of Assessment areas in CRA Other on-going work in CORE Review: Consideration of Language options in Perspectives on the Human Condition. Regular Petitions to CORE Curriculum Jin Brown, Chair CORE Review Committee *************** ATTACHMENT 86/7 UAF FACULTY SENATE #86 MARCH 8, 1999 SUBMITTED BY FACULTY APPEALS & OVERSIGHT REPORT OF THE SEVENTH MEETING OF THE FACULTY APPEALS AND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE PRESENT: Tara Maginnis, Kristy Long, Fred Dyen, Ray Gavlak, Don Kramer (Eleanor Evans rep), George Guthridge, Godwin Chukwu ABSENT: John Kelley, David Verbyla, Pham Quang, James Ruppert, Richard Stolzberg The committee met on Wednesday, February 17, 1999 in the Chancellor's conference room from 1-2 p.m. 1. Due to sickness, John Kelley was absent from the meeting. Tara Maginnis chaired meeting number 7. No action was taken on approval of the minutes. 2. No further action was taken on further review of academic administrators. 3. The draft motion on the appeals board was the main action item for discussion at this meeting. A further modification was suggested. The following sentence was suggested for insertion between the 1st and 2nd paragraphs: Faculty appeals will be dealt with in accordance with the appropriate contract. 4. Discussion concerning the evaluation of the Chancellor addressed Dr. Jerry McBeath's request for representation of a newly formed committee for this purpose. The committee required further clarification of the purpose of the committee. A previous request for volunteers from the Appeals Committee to serve on the Chancellor review committee met with no volunteers. 5. Old Business: Status of grade appeals and enforcement should be revisited 6. New Business: none 7. Next meeting(s): March 24 and April 21. *************** ATTACHMENT 86/8 UAF FACULTY SENATE #86 MARCH 8, 1999 SUBMITTED BY FACULTY DEVELOPMENT, ASSESSMENT & IMPROVEMENT Members: Channon P Price, David A Bantz, Dennis G Schall, Daniel M White, David O Porter, James M Collins, Scott L Huang, Roxie R Dinstel, Linda R Curda The committee decided to prepare, distribute and evaluate a questionanaire to members of the Faculty Senate regarding 1) their perceptions of requirements for success in the tenure and promotion processes and 2) their preferences in allocating UAF resources to support faculty development. The quesionnaire will be an imporve version of the form used last year. A draft is in progress. Respectfully submitted, David O. Porter *************** ATTACHMENT 86/9 UAF FACULTY SENATE #86 MARCH 8, 1999 SUBMITTED BY GRADUATE SCHOOL ADVISORY COMMITTEE GSAC Report - Monday, January 22, 1999 The Graduate School Advisory Committee met on February 22 and discussed two issues: 1) pilot programs and 2) university housing for new graduate students. The committee feels that the admissions is working well except for the "crunch" period of Feb. and March. Data entry starts to lag behind at that time. The committee reaffirmed its previous recommendation that an extra staff person who is knowledgeable about graduate student applications be hired during that time. Eric Jozwiak discussed the improvements that are being introduced into the housing process for graduate students by Residence Life staff. It was agreed that the quality of housing could be used to improve graduate student recruiting. Larry Duffy *************** ATTACHMENT 86/10 UAF FACULTY SENATE #86 MARCH 8, 1999 SUBMITTED BY AD HOC COMMITTEE ON AQSI Report--Ad Hoc Committee on UAF & Alaska Quality Schools Initiative (AQSI) First Meeting: Friday, February 19, 1999 Participants: Carol Barnhardt (co-chair), (School of Education, Fbks. Campus), Cindy Hardy (Developmental English, Fbks. Campus), Joe Mason (English, Northwest Campus), Delena Norris-Tull (College of Rural Alaska, School of Education, Math/Science Project), Kay Thomas (Rural Student Services, Fbks. Campus), Jane Weber (co- chair) (Development Math, Fbks. Campus) Handouts: Alaska Quality Schools Initiative Information, Alaska Staff Development Network Information, Alaska High School Qualifying Exam (description, sample questions, dates for test administration, years for student eligibility, etc.) Task of the Ad-Hoc Committee: ?? Determine how UAF can best collaborate with K-12 schools and with the Alaska Department of Education to support the Alaska Quality Schools Initiative and, in particular, how to best respond to the needs of students and school districts in regard to the new Alaska High School Qualifying Exam component of the Quality Schools Initiative. Recommendations due to UAF Faculty Senate in April? Notes from Dr. Nick Stayrook: Notes from conversation with Dr. Nick Stayrook, Director of Program Planning and Evaluation for the Fairbanks North Star Borough School District. Dr. Stayrook is also working directly with the Alaska Department of Education on the development and piloting of the High School Qualifying Exam. * This is an excellent opportunity for UAF to collaborate with the broader education community in Alaska. * Students who have not passed the qualifying exam may want to take courses through UAF to better prepare them. Students may come to UAF only because they want assistance in studying for the exam, or they may come to UAF to pursue a degree but, in the process, they want or NEED to have a high school diploma first. UAF could provide courses in reading, writing and math, and UAF could become an official testing center for the exam. (UAF would not have the authority to issue a diploma though.) Students receive a separate score in each of the three academic areas and can choose to take (or retake) just one at a time. * Some school districts will also continue to offer coursework for students who have not passed the exam (particularly for those who have not yet completed all of the credit requirements). By state statute, students can be served up to the age of 20. * Students are eligible for a diploma for up to three years after they complete their high school course requirements. * Recommendation is that UAF faculty find ways to "connect" with the Alaska Department of Education and with K-12 teachers and administrators. What Next? Recommendations for other committee members? Defining task of Committee? Next meeting date and time? Carol Barnhardt UAF School of Education