MINUTES UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #70 MONDAY, MARCH 10, 1997 WOOD CENTER BALLROOMI The meeting was called to order by President Lynch at 1:30 p.m. A. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: Bandopadhyay, S. Braddock, J. Barnhardt, C. McFadden, T. Barry, R. Perkins, M. Beget, J. Pippenger, M. Boone, R. RaLonde, R Cooper, B. Ruess, D. Craven, J. Spell, D. Creed, J. Wade, C. Curda, L. Fast, P. (J. Moessner) Finney, B. Gavlak, R. OTHERS PRESENT: Jennings, M. Duffy, L. Kelley, J. Gregory, G. Lynch, D. Ivey, P. Maginnis, T. Keating, J. McBeath, G. Layral, S. McLean-Nelson, D. Morack, J. Mortensen, B. Reichardt, P. Nance, K. Thomas, D. Nielsen, H. Wadlow, J. Reynolds, J. Robinson, T. Schatz, M. Schweitzer, P. Seifert, R. Walworth, J. (S. Dofing) Weber, J. NON-VOTING MEMBERS PRESENT: NON-VOTING MEMBERS ABSENT: J. Hayes - ASUAF 1 graduate student M. Scholle - UAFSC Alexander, V. - Dean, SFOS Hedahl, G. - Dean, CLA Tremarello, A - University Registrar B. The minutes to Meeting #69 (February 10, 1997) were approved as distributed via e-mail. C. The agenda was approved as distributed via e-mail. II Status of Chancellor's Office Actions 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: 1. Motion to amend the UAF Regulations for the Evaluation of Faculty, Article IV.B.2. III A. Comments from Chancellor Wadlow - Chancellor Wadlow spoke on developing a plan to pay the FY98 costs because there will be a gap between known costs and the available Fund 1 budget. A target of $5 million represents a mid-way goal between the best and worst case scenario. The level of state appropriation is uncertain, but the University will probably be facing legislative cuts. A strategy plan for meeting the shortfall must meet selected goals and needs as identified as high priority. New approaches on how to conduct business have to be addressed and focus will be placed on maintaining quality in everything we do. However, we may not be able to continue to do things in the future that we do now. The process will be integrated and use multiple tools to find funds. The major tool for funding FY98 will be vacancies. This will include the RIP positions for faculty and staff. Because the RIP positions are bound to stringent rules and not evenly distributed, the vacancy pool will be enlarged to include all vacancies beginning January 1. This will provide more flexibility and provide for a wider range of action. Other tools include internal funding within units to pay for compensation adjustments. The third tool, if the budget is cut, will be a tax to units. It will be centrally assessed and it will be differential and not across the board. The Chancellor's memo describing these strategies has been distributed. One high priority is to increase graduate assistantships. Dean Kan has taken 10 new assistantships and turned them into 31-32. Matching equipment funds have been increased. This will assist units with reaccreditation needs. Units should work with their external advisory boards to solicit ideas. In order to find the $5 million needed to secure the FY98 budget, $3.3 million will come from the vacancy funds. The Chancellor indicated that the new UAF Experts Guide was out and included a new section of Science Fair Judges. The Chancellor commended the Senate leadership on their call to arms for recruiting. Jerry McBeath asked if the vacancy pool would included previously unfunded positions. The Chancellor indicated that If positions were advertised prior to January 1st, then they would not be included. B. Comments from Provost, Jack Keating - Provost Keating indicated that approximately $1.085 million of the RIP salaries would be available. Deans and Directors will receive some money. Approximately 40% of the pool will be restored. This does not guarantee that each position will be filled. The RIP is a management tool. Deans will be asked to prioritize their needs for faculty, staff, operations and equipment. The Provost will be looking at such things as collaboration and relationships developed between departments, strengths and potentials that need to be included in academic programs, expertise extended to other sites through distance delivery. However undesirable UAF must look at this as a window of opportunity to evaluate where UAF will be in 3- 5 years. The Provost spoke on faculty merit pay which is mandated as 2.6% of the salary pool. 1.6% of the pool is for merit pay for faculty. The 1% for promotions, equity, retention and extraordinary performance will be collected from each unit and will be distributed from a central pool. Rich Seifert introduced a resolution of appreciation for the Provost's support of the Faculty Seminar Series. The resolution was read, moved, and passed unanimously. 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. ****************** IV Governance Reports A. ASUAF - J. Hayes Joe Hayes presented the ASUAF report. The ASUAF Senate passed a bill recognizing the support that faculty and staff give to students. The bill includes a biweekly recognition program. Joe has been working as a legislative intern tracking bills. The Legislative Information Office holds biweekly audioconferences and the Senators were encouraged to attend and testify. On May 3 UAF and the Alumni Association with be hosting a graduation party. There is a proposal before ASUAF concerning a concert series. Presently the only facility available is the Patty Center which holds 2,000 people. ASUAF is working to help foster a good public image of UAF by visiting Lathrop High School and talking with their student government about the University. They also plan to visit other area high schools. Joe thanked Don Lynch for attending the ASUAF Senate meeting. B. Staff Council - M. Scholle Marie Scholle presented the Staff Council report, as well as reported on System Governance Council. The Staff Council is working on a leave program combining sick and annual leave into a paid time off program. Nominations for President-Elect are open and the Council will vote at the May 7 meeting. Rural members are working on improved communication between themselves, as well as between the rural sites and the main campus. The second round of Supervisory Training sessions are underway and are open to everyone interested. To register send an e-mail message to: email@example.com. Marie was part of the group that went to Juneau to talk with the legislators. They targeted members of the House and Senate Finance committee and the University subcommittee and did not receive a positive reception. C. President's Report - D. Lynch Don commented on the Governor's budget included in his report. The University as a whole--all segments--is hurting. Don suggested that faculty pay attention to the recent news articles written by Claus Naske, Art Boswell, and Wendy Hower concerning presidential funding, support for the University, and support for higher education. Don also indicated that he experienced hostility toward him from the legislators. Marie Scholle indicated that Governor Knowles will be in Fairbanks on Thursday. Madeline Schatz spoke about why she came to UAF and the duties she now finds herself doing. Mike Jennings was part of the group in Juneau and his sense of the legislature is that they find the University lacks leadership and that we must retrench centrally. John Craven indicated that he had attended the February Board of Regents meeting and visited members of the legislature while he was in Juneau. The next meeting of the Board of Regents is April 16-18. He will be attending as the new spokesperson for the Faculty Alliance. D. President-Electıs Comments - J. Craven John Craven followed up on his call to arms for student recruiting and stresses four points. 1) Admissions depends on help from departments. 2) When students applies that information is sent to the department. If the department doesn't follow up on that student, it doesn't happen elsewhere. 3) A list of names are created from students who indicate interest in a department. The list is sent to departments. The departments need to follow up on these students. 4) There is a phone campaign scheduled for Sunday from 5-8 p.m. to contact students who have expressed an interest in UAF. Contact Admissions to participate. E. System Governance Council - M. Scholle Marie Scholle continued to speak about her experiences in Juneau talking with legislators. The reception was not positive and encouraged all faculty to take an active role in lobbying for University funding. V Public Comments/Questions - none VI New Business A. Motion to amend the Evaluation of Educational Effectiveness policy, submitted by Curricular Affairs Dana Thomas spoke on the motion and indicated that the rationale included the reasons for the changes. His committee has been working with Curricular Affairs and approved the change made by Curricular Affairs. The motion passed unanimously. MOTION PASSED ============== 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 POLICYIn 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. ******************** B. Motion to amend Section 3 (ARTICLE V: Committees, Permanent) of the Bylaws, submitted by Curricular Affairs Jerry McBeath spoke on the addition of the Curriculum Review Committee as a Permanent Committee in the Senate Bylaws. The motion passed unanimously. MOTION PASSED ============== 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. ******************** C. Motion to amend Section 3 (ARTICLE V: Committees, Permanent) of the Bylaws, submitted by Core Review Jerry McBeath indicated that he could not speak on this motion and maybe Janice Reynolds could. This motion is similar to the previous one in that it adds the Core Review Committee to the Senate Bylaws. Gayle Gregory and Ann Tremarello also spoke on behalf of the motion. The motion passed unanimously. MOTION PASSED ============== 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. ******************** D. Motion to include a statement on Course Prerequisites in the new class schedule and in the Catalog, submitted by Curricular Affairs Ann Tremarello indicated that this motion would add the statement concerning course prerequisites to the catalog and class schedule. Janice Reynolds spoke against the motion indicating that it set up barriers for students. The motion passed with 1 nay. MOTION PASSED ============== 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. ******************** E. Motion to approve the M.S. & Ph.D. Environmental Chemistry, submitted by Graduate Curricular Affairs Larry Duffy spoke on the new degree program and indicated that in has been in the works for a few years and was submitted to the Graduate Council two years ago. They have reworked in and are again submitting it to the Senate for approval. When asked about funding, Larry indicated that over the past few years they have internally been reallocating positions and funds for the program. The motion passed unanimously. MOTION PASSED ============== 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. ******************** F. Motion to amend the UAF Regulations for the Evaluation of Faculty, IV.B.3.d., submitted by University-wide Promotion & Tenure Committee John Keller indicated that with the creation of mega-colleges there needed to be a different membership configuration and election to the University-wide Promotion and Tenure Committee. The committee considered the number of tenure track faculty within the different units and disciplines and recommends the addition of two members. The motion passed unanimously. MOTION PASSED ============== 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. ******************** G. Nominations for President-Elect Janice Reynolds nominated Madeline Schatz and John Craven nominated Maynard Perkins. Nominations will remain open until the next Senate meeting when the election takes place. VIII Committee Reports A. Curricular Affairs - Maynard Perkins Minutes of the February 17 meeting were included in the agenda. The following minutes of the March 3 meeting were distributed as a Handout. Minutes of Curricular Affairs Meeting, March 3, 1997 Meeting Chaired by Maynard Perkins Minutes by Carol Barnhardt Attending: Sukumar Bandopadhyay, Carol Barnhardt, John Creed, Gayle Gregory, Jerry McBeath, Wanda Martin, Maynard Perkins, Paul Reichardt, Madeline Schatz, Ann Tremarello AGENDA ITEMS: 1. GENERAL INFORMATION AND MEMBER CONCERNS: - Maynard Perkins will not be able to attend the March 10 Faculty Senate meeting. He asked for volunteers to speak to the motions Curricular Affairs has sent to the floor. - Provost Keating was invited to attend this meeting to present his views on two agenda items (course deletions from catalog and course prerequisites). 2. ADDITIONS OR CHANGES TO AGENDA: DISCUSSION: At the January 20th Curricular Affairs meeting, two issues were discussed regarding completion of CORE requirements: one dealing with CORE requirements for students who have already completed a bachelor's degree and the second dealing with transfer students who have completed Associate degrees from identified institutions in the state of Washington. No action has been taken on either item since that meeting. The committee decided to discuss these two issues separately and we determined that we were ready to vote on the first issue at this meeting. ACTION: - Ann will prepare a motion on the second issue and send it to Jin Brown and to Maynard and then bring it to Curricular Affairs at the next meeting. - The following motion was approved unanimously: MOTION PASSED: ============== Any student who has completed a bachelor's degree from an accredited institution will be considered to have completed the equivalent of the baccalaureate core when officially accepted to an undergraduate degree program at UAF. Rationale: There was little discussion on this motion. However, committee members wanted to be certain that everyone understands that this motion addresses baccalaureate CORE courses ONLY. 3. INFORMATION REGARDING ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE RESPONSE TO CURRICULAR AFFAIR ITEMS SENT FOLLOWING FEBRUARY 17 MEETING DISCUSSION: Maynard reported that the Administrative Committee had returned two items to Curricular Affairs: (1) Resolution regarding the Provost's Deletion of Courses; and (2)recommended catalog statement regarding Course Prerequisites. The Administrative Committee placed the amended Evaluation of Educational Effectiveness Policy on the March 10 Senate agenda, and it also put the proposed changes in the Curriculum Review bylaws on the agenda with a recommendation for an additional change. CURRICULUM REVIEW BY-LAWS ACTION: No changes were mad in the recommendation that had been approved by Curricular Affairs on February 17th. 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. 4. COURSE DELETION FROM CATALOG DISCUSSION: The Administrative Committee wanted information added that specified which curricular committees would have responsibility for review. Discussion of responsibility for review focused on the following issues: - Reviewing the entire catalog is a labor-intensive job and shouldn't be the responsibility of a single person or unit. - General consensus was that this was the responsibility of departments or programs and it is to their advantage to do this self monitoring and careful management of courses. - BANNER will not bring over the curricular history of all courses, but a list will be generated from SIS of the past 10 years of courses and these lists will be sent to departments. - Philosophically, this responsibility is best handled at the department level, but this then becomes an additional responsibility for department heads. - Departments need to be very cautious about accidentally deleting courses that are offered in rural areas by rural faculty. - No courses would be dropped without Faculty Senate approval. ACTION: AMENDED MOTION PASSED ======================= "Inclusion of courses, certificate and degree programs in the printed University catalog, or their deletion, fall under Faculty Senate business. ((The Senate Curricular Committees)) DEPARTMENTS OR PROGRAMS will review courses not offered in the previous five-year period and consider whether they should be deleted." Rationale: Curricular Affairs agreed that it was important to specify which units would have responsibility for review. The consensus was that this is the responsibility of each department or program, and that a required monitoring and management of courses every five years would be of benefit to those departments and programs that do not currently in initiate their own review. Curricular Affairs recommends that departments publish (via e-mail as much as possible) their list at least 10 days prior to Senate Review. Following publication of the lists for all faculty to review, the recommendations will go to the appropriate Senate Committees (Graduate Curricular Affairs or Undergraduate Curriculum Review). This process provides a second opportunity for faculty review. 5. COURSE PREREQUISITES: DISCUSSION: The statements below regarding course prerequisites have been forwarded to the Administrative Committee. 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." It was returned to Curricular Affairs with questions regarding: timing of drop; distinction between "knowledge" vs. "specific courses" in the definition of prerequisite; and general concern with the concept of course prerequisites. The Provost stated that he would recommend to the Chancellor that she not approve this motion if it were forwarded from the Senate. Issues addressed during the discussion of the reason for the submission of the statement and in response to the Administrative Committee's concerns included the following: - It is important that this statement or something similar be included in the class schedule and catalog. - There is confusion on how and why this issue developed at this time--perhaps in response to discussions about BANNER and the fact that students may not have complete transcripts or complete records on BANNER, but the new system will NOT automatically keep students out of classes based on prerequisite courses. - The present UAF Catalog, on page 15 under "Faculty Initiated Withdrawal," states: "If you do not meet the prerequisites for a courses in which you have enrolled, the faculty member teaching that course has the right to drop you from the class prior to the fourth Friday after the first day of instruction." ACTION: No action taken because the recommendation on course prerequisites simply mirrors what is already in the catalog. It is clear that the policy was previously established, and therefore, there is no need to take any action now. 6. ADDITIONAL ITEMS FROM FEBRUARY 17 MEETING: - Maynard reported that there was no action yet on the issue of residency credits for distance-delivered courses. - The Ad Hoc Committee that is reviewing the Petition Process is meeting and they will keep Maynard advised of their progress, and he will keep Curricular Affairs posted. The meeting was adjourned at 3:15. *************** B. Faculty & Scholarly Affairs - Ray Gavlak A report was attached to the agenda. C. Graduate Curricular Affairs - Mark Tumeo A report was attached to the agenda. D. CNCSHDR - Rudy Krejci No report was given. E. Developmental Studies - Ron Illingworth The following written report was submitted by Ron Illingworth February Senate Report 1. Student Placement Tests a. The Developmental Studies Committee has continued to evaluate COMPASS as a supplement to the ASSET test. The program was used during the Fall and placement recommendations were established. b. COMPASS is a computerized testing program which could allow the student and his or her advisor to access the program from the advisor's 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 CLA, the Developmental Studies committee has approved several course designator changes and three new courses for the Student Support Services Project of the Fairbanks Campus. At our next meeting we will be discussing advising issues as they relate to this reorganization in CLA. 3. With great trepidation, the Developmental Studies Committee agreed to the elimination of the NB grade. ***************** F. Faculty Appeals & Oversight - Diane Bischak No report was given. G. Faculty Development, Assessment & Improvement - Rich Seifert Faculty Seminars will take place on Tuesday, March 11 and Monday, April 14. Rudy Krejci will speak on "The search for truth, beauty, and right cannot be decided by democratic majority vote--doing so is a sign of barbarism!" at the April 14 faculty seminar in the Salisbury Theatre at 5:00 p.m. H. Graduate School Advisory Committee - Susan Hendricks No report was given. I. Legislative & Fiscal Affairs - Michael Jennings No report was given. J. Service Committee - Kara Nance No report was given. K. University-Wide Promotion/Tenure - John Keller No report was given. VIII Discussion Items - none IX Members' Comments/Questions - none X Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m. Tapes of this Faculty Senate meeting are in the Governance Office, 312 Signers' Hall if anyone wishes to listen to the complete tapes. Submitted by Sheri Layral, Faculty Senate Secretary.