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

For Audioconferencing:  Bridge #:  1-877-751-8040
				(Passcode:  512265)
				Fairbanks:  474-8050
				(Chair's Passcode:  802028)

A G E N D A
UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #105
Monday, December 10, 2001
1:30 p.m. - 4:00 p.m.
Board of Regents' Conference Room
109 Butrovich Building

1:30	I	Call to Order – Norm Swazo      			  5 Min.
		A.	Roll Call
		B.	Approval of Minutes to Meeting #104
		C.	Adoption of Agenda

1:35	II	Status of Chancellor's Office Actions 		  5 Min.
		A.	Motions Approved:  
			1.	Motion to approve the UAF Academic 
				Development Plan.
			2.	Motion to eliminate the credit hour 
				restriction of correspondence study 
				work for certificates, associate and 
				AAS degrees, and bachelor's degrees.
			3.	Motion to amend the policy on Course 
				Restrictions for graduate degrees.
			4.	Motion to suspend the procedure for 
				votes of censure.
		B.	Motions Pending:  none

1:40	III	A.	Remarks by Chancellor M. Lind   		10 Min.
		B.	Remarks by Provost P. Reichardt		  5 Min.
		C.	Carol Gold, Academic Liaison    		  5 Min.

2:00	IV	Governance Reports
	A.	ASUAF -D. Miller / GSO - 		    		  5 Min.
	B.	Staff Council - S. McCrea 				  5 Min.
	C.	President's Report - N. Swazo     			  5 Min.

2:15	V	Discussion Items   					10 Min.
	A.	Early Tenure (Attachment 105/1)

2:25	VI	Old Business						15 Min.
	A.	Motion to recommend that the UA Board of Regents' 
		amend the UA non-discrimination statement, referred 
		back to the Administrative Committee 
		(Attachment 105/2 & Attachment 105/3)

2:40	VII	Public Comments/Questions 				  5 Min.

2:45		***BREAK***						10 Min

2:55	VIII	New Business						45 Min. 
	A.	Motion to amend the procedure for votes of 
		censure, submitted by Administrative Committee 
		(Attachment 105/4)
	B.	Motion to approve the Certificate in Medical 
		Billing and Coding, submitted by Curricular Affairs 
		(Attachment 105/5)
	C.	Motion to approve the deletion of the B.Ed., 
		submitted by Curricular Affairs (Attachment 105/6)
	D. 	Motion to amend the AAS degree requirements, 
		submitted by Curricular Affairs (Attachment 105/7)
	E. 	Motion to amend the AA degree requirements, 
		submitted by Curricular Affairs (Attachment 105/8)
	F.	Motion to amend the Natural Science requirement 
		of the Baccalaureate Core Curriculum, submitted 
		by Core Review Committee (Attachment 105/9)
	G.	Motion to approve the deletion of the MAT, 
		Elementary, submitted by Graduate Academic & 
		Advisory Committee (Attachment 105/10)
	H.	Motion to approve the Master's in Software 
		Engineering, submitted by Graduate Academic & 
		Advisory Committee (Attachment 105/11)

3:40	IX	Committee Reports 					15 Min.
	A.	Curricular Affairs - R. Illingworth (Handout)
	B.	Faculty Affairs - P. McRoy (Attachment 105/12)
	C.	Graduate Academic & Advisory Committee – H. Eicken
			(Attachment 105/13)
	D.	Core Review - J. Brown (Attachment 105/14)
	E.	Curriculum Review - P. Pinney (Attachment 105/15)
	F.	Developmental Studies - J. Weber (Handout)
	G.	Faculty Appeals & Oversight - J. Moessner 
			(Attachment 105/16)
	H.	Faculty Development, Assessment & Improvement – 
D. McLean-Nelson (Attachment 105/17)

3:55	X	Members' Comments/Questions			  5 Min.

4:00	XI	Adjournment

ATTACHMENT 105/1
UAF Faculty Senate #105
December 10, 2001

From:  Hild Peters <fnhmp@uaf.edu>
To:  Debi McLean-Nelson <rfdlm@uaf.edu>
Subject:  Early Tenure,
Date:  Wed, Nov 7, 2001, 12:23 AM

Thank you for your request.  Please find the information that I have on early tenure beginning with AY 1996-97.  Prior to 1999 candidates were not listed as specifically standing for early tenure, although candidates standing in their mandatory year were marked as such.

AY1996-97
14 candidates for promotion and tenure, 14 awarded
3 candidates for promotion and mandatory tenure, 2 awarded, 1 denied

AY1997-98
10 candidates for promotion and tenure, 10 awarded
10 candidates for promotion and tenure, 10 awarded
7 candidates for promotion and mandatory tenure, 7 awarded

AY1998-99
7 candidates for promotion and tenure, 7 awarded
3 candidates for promotion and mandatory tenure, 3 awarded

AY1999-00
5 candidates for promotion and early tenure, 5 awarded
5 candidates for promotion and mandatory tenure, 4 awarded, 1 denied

AY2000-01
15 candidates for promotion and early tenure, 13 awarded, 2 files withdrawn
1 candidate for early tenure, awarded
1 candidate for mandatory tenure, awarded
7 candidates for promotion and mandatory tenure, 7 awarded

Hild Peters
Assistant to the Provost
907-474-5178

ATTACHMENT 105/2
UAF Faculty Senate #105
December 10, 2001

November 26, 2001

Godwin Chukwu
President UAF Faculty Senate

Re:  Analysis of University of Alaska Sexual Orientation Policies

Godwin,

I am writing in response to our discussion of November 19, 2001.

First, I am not aware of any Alaska State or Federal laws that directly prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.  There are a number of laws that prohibit various actions which might be motivated by discrimination, such as assault and battery, but which are based on the result, not the discrimination.

Second, I think it would be misleading to modify the existing policy by simply inserting “sexual orientation” among the other classifications of illegal discrimination.  To do so would imply directly that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is prohibited by state and federal law, which it does not appear to be.

Third, in my opinion, the Board of Regents’ bylaws and policies already go beyond state and federal law and prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.  This is the case although sexual orientation is not specifically mentioned.  The issue of sexual orientation being added to BOR policies was raised in 1993.  At that time after much debate, it was decided that a prohibition directed to “sexual orientation” would not be added to the bylaw, but that a general statement that would protect against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation would.  

The issue of adding sexual orientation was again addressed in 1996.  My opinion at the time, and one that was accepted by the Board, was that the language added in 1993 did, in fact, prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.  Consequently, the existing language was retained.

There are a number of references in policy and regulation that I interpret to prohibit discrimination on the basis of any number of criteria, including sexual orientation.  Here are some:

1.	Bylaws article VII:  

“Article VII.	Nondiscrimination

	It is the policy of the Board that in accordance with federal and state law, illegal discrimination against any individual because of race, color, religion, national origin, age, sex, Vietnam era or disabled veteran status, physical or mental disability, changes in marital status, pregnancy or parenthood is prohibited.  Decisions affecting individuals shall be based on the individual's qualifications, abilities and performance, as appropriate.”

The final sentence was added in 1993.  It was clear at the time that by inserting the last sentence, an employment decision that was based on something other than qualifications, abilities and performance would be contrary to the bylaw.  Sexual orientation as a basis for decisions affecting individuals was understood to be something other than qualifications, abilities and performance.  Other provisions of Policy include this same sentiment. 

I do not recall any cases of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation since I came here in April 1996.  I was not told of any prior to my arrival, other than the health benefits issue.  I am sure that there have been none in which the bylaw was found to be inadequate since my arrival.  Thus, I believe that the university has adequate policies in place to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

2.  Regents' Policy 04.02.010:

"B.	Equal Employment Opportunity Program

The program of equal employment opportunity consists of two parts: nondiscrimination and a program of affirmative action.  
...
1.	Nondiscrimination

...
b.	Consideration of Individual Merit

University of Alaska hiring decisions will be based on the individual's qualifications, demonstrated abilities and performance, as appropriate.”

3.  Regents' Policy 04.02.020:

"Discrimination and Sexual Harassment	R04.02.020

A.	Discrimination

1.	Prohibition Against Discrimination

a.	Discrimination is a form of misconduct which undermines the integrity of the working and learning environment and will not be tolerated on or at University of Alaska premises or functions.

b.	Subject to the constraints of Regents' Policy, the broadest range of legally permissible speech and expression will be tolerated in the learning environment, student and scholarly publications, and at public forums open to public debate and the exchange of ideas.

2.	Definitions

a.	"Discrimination" refers to being adversely treated or affected, either intentionally or unintentionally, in a manner that unlawfully differentiates or makes distinctions on the basis of an individual's legally protected status or on some basis other than an individual's qualifications, abilities, and performance, as appropriate.  "

4.  Regents Policy 04.01.020:

"Nondiscrimination Statement	P04.01.020

In accordance with federal and state law, illegal discrimination in employment against any individual because of race, color, religion, national origin, age, sex, veteran status, physical or mental disability, marital status or changes in marital status, pregnancy or parenthood is prohibited.  Decisions affecting an individual's employment will be based on the individual's qualifications, abilities and performance, as appropriate."

5.  Regents' Policy 10.08.010:  

"Equal Educational Opportunity	P10.08.01

The University of Alaska is committed to establishing equal educational opportunity, to opposing and prohibiting illegal discrimination in the provision of educational opportunities, and to eliminating illegal discriminatory educational practices.  All academic decisions, including those affecting educational programs and activities available to a student, will be based on the student's qualifications, abilities, and performance, as appropriate. All academic decisions will conform with requirements of state and federal laws and regulations pertaining to non-discrimination and equal educational opportunity."

The authority in charge of accreditation for a particular program at UAA questioned whether the university had a statement of nondiscrimination based on sexual orientation.  The office of diversity and compliance reiterated that our bylaw and policies accomplish that intent, without expressly mentioning sexual orientation.  We have not heard that the accreditation authority found this unacceptable.

In the health benefits arena, the plans applicable to university represented and nonrepresented employees provide coverage for financially interdependent partners.  Financially interdependent partners are also considered family members for sick leave purposes.  R04.06.130.  A recent Superior Court opinion has apparently held that the state and the City of Anchorage are not obligated to provide health benefits to gay and lesbian couples.  The reference to the article is:

http://www.adn.com/alaska/story/736105p-784032c.html

As far as I know, no statute or decisional law would prevent the Board of Regents from adopting the same position as the state and City of Anchorage and deny health care benefits to financially interdependent partners.  A change in existing Policies or Bylaws would not create a different result.  At present, however, I am aware of no inclination to follow that course, although the issue has not come up.  

Conclusion:

From the standpoint of current statutory and decisional law, it would be misleading to add sexual orientation to the list of illegal discriminations under state and federal law.  From a policy standpoint, the university goes beyond state law to prohibit discrimination against anyone on the basis of sexual orientation.  There is no need to mention it specifically in an additional provision prohibiting discrimination.   Changing the bylaw or policy would not bind the Board of Regents in any event.  

From a practical standpoint, there have been no allegations of university discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation that came to my attention since April of 1996 when I came on board.  Certainly there have been none that the existing policy has not been sufficient to address.  The absence of problems mitigates any need for change.

The recent superior court case does not affect the validity of the University’s current policies.  But in light of that case, an effort to change the policy to add sexual orientation could cause a re-argument of the financially interdependent partner program at the University, which I would not see as helpful.

Sincerely,

James A. (Jamo) Parrish
UA General Counsel

ATTACHMENT 105/3
UAF Faculty Senate #105
December 10, 2001
SUBMITTED BY ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE

MOTION: 
======

The UAF Faculty Senate recommends that the University of Alaska Board of Regents' amend the UA Nondiscrimination Statement (P04.01.020) as follows:

CAPS  = 	Additions to the statement 

In accordance with federal and state laws, illegal discrimination in employment against any individual because of race, color, religion, national origin, age, sex, veteran status, physical or mental disability, marital status or changes in marital status, pregnancy or parenthood, or SEXUAL ORIENTATION is prohibited.  Decisions affecting an individual’s employment will be based on the individual’s qualifications, abilities and performance, as appropriate.

EFFECTIVE:  	The UAF Faculty Senate requests that first 
discussion of the amendment be placed on the Human 
Resources Committee agenda at the March BOR meeting.

RATIONALE:  	Under the current policy, students, staff and 
faculty could be discriminated against because of their 
sexual orientation.  As an institution of higher learning, 
the University of Alaska should be setting an example to 
the rest of the state in terms of recognizing and 
respecting all of the diverse peoples of Alaska.  By adding 
sexual orientation to the policy, the university is further 
sending a message to all students, staff, and faculty that 
this is a place where they are welcome, accepted, and 
protected against discrimination. 

ATTACHMENT 105/4
UAF Faculty Senate #105
December 10, 2001
SUBMITTED BY ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE

MOTION:
======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend the interim procedures for votes of censure or votes of no confidence of administrators as approved by the Senate at its meeting #104 on October 29, 2001.  

CAPS  =   Additions

In the interim, the Senate requires that faculty calling into question their confidence in an administrator of a college, school, or campus request by memorandum to the UAF Provost and the UAF Faculty Senate President an immediate evaluation of the administrator according to the process defined in the current policy “Guidelines for the Evaluation Process for Administrators” (as passed at Senate Meeting #97, 30 October 2000).  This request must be warranted by a simple majority vote (absentee vote included) of all academic and/or special rank faculty WITH TITLE PRECEEDED BY 'RESEARCH' OR 'TERM' of that unit.  This vote must be taken in a manner that accords with Board of Regents regulation on Open Meetings (R02.06.01 ff.).  A faculty vote of censure or vote of no confidence taken contrary to this interim procedure will be considered out of order by the Faculty Senate and without merit for official action.

	EFFECTIVE:  	Immediately, to be in effect until the Senate 
		approves a revised procedure for votes of censure/votes 
		of no confidence of administrators.

	RATIONALE: 	This clarifies which faculty are eligible to vote.  

ATTACHMENT 105/5
UAF Faculty Senate #105
December 10, 2001
SUBMITTED BY CURRICULAR AFFAIRS

MOTION:
======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to approve a Certificate in Medical Billing and Coding which includes two new courses. 

	EFFECTIVE:  	Fall 2002 or 
				Upon Board of Regents' Approval

	RATIONALE: 	See full program proposal #43-44 and #45 
		on file in the Governance Office, 312 Signers’ Hall.

				***************

	(Submitted by Allied Health)
43.	NEW COURSE:  HLTH 208 - Human Diseases (3+0) 3 credits; 
	offered Fall and As Demand Warrants; effective Fall 2002.  
44.	NEW COURSE:  HLTH 236 - Insurance Reimbursement for the 
	Medical Office (3+0) 3 credits; offered Fall and Spring; may 
	be repeated; effective Fall 2002.  
45.	NEW DEGREE PROGRAM:  Certificate, Medical Billing and Coding - 
	Requires 31 credits (10 courses); effective Fall 2002 or upon 
	BOR approval.  

				***************

Executive Summary
Certificate, Medical Billing and Coding

The field of medical administration has expanded in recent years.  The Medical Billing and Coding Program is designed to incorporate theory and application.  This focused delivery will provide the student with the knowledge and job skills required for entry-level employment in the medical field.

There is a current and future need for trained medical billers and coders.  Health care delivery is changing.  Practitioners are being challenged to deliver quality patient care as well as contain the rising costs.  Managed care programs, patient's loss of insurance and reduction in benefits, cost containment measures, and community pressure have amplified the market for competent and cross-trained medical billers and coders.  

To summarize, there is a current need for educated medical billers and coders, which is projected to extend into the foreseeable future.  The proposed Medical Billing and Coding Certificate program will prepare students for employment in the medical field.  Implementation of this program will position the College of Rural Alaska, Tanana Valley Campus to meet the present and increasing demand for vocational-technical training and provide the medical community with medical billers and coders.  

ATTACHMENT 105/6
UAF Faculty Senate #105
December 10, 2001
SUBMITTED BY CURRICULAR AFFAIRS

MOTION:
======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to delete the B.Ed. 

	EFFECTIVE:  	Spring 2003 or 
				Upon Board of Regents' Approval

	RATIONALE: 	See full program proposal #78 on file in the 
				Governance Office, 312 Signers’ Hall.

				***************

Executive Summary
B.Ed. 

The University of Alaska provided four-year undergraduate B.Ed. degrees at UAA, UAF and UAS until the Board of Regents suspended admission to these degrees in 1998.  Since they have been replaced by new degrees, we are requesting that the B.Ed. be deleted.  Students who were declared as B.Ed. majors prior to that time have had the option, and the support necessary, to complete their degree requirements by December of 2002. 

Between 1998 and 2001, the only route for students wishing to gain teacher certification within the UA system was to complete a 5th year, post-baccalaureate teacher preparation program.  However, in 2000, each MAU was given permission to develop a new undergraduate degree program that would prepare students as elementary teachers.  In June of 2001, the UA Board of Regents approved new undergraduate degrees at each of the MAU's.  These degrees, all defined as a Bachelor of Arts in Elementary Education, serve as a replacement for the B.Ed. at each of the three campuses.  The new degrees were designed collaboratively by UAA, UAF and UAS faculty and there is transferability for students throughout the University of Alaska system. 

The new degree incorporates many of the courses and components of the previous degree, but its design includes new responsibilities for students and faculty, and it responds directly to new national and state standards including NCATE standards, the Alaska Teacher Standards, the Alaska Student Content Standards and the Alaska Standards for Culturally Responsive Schools.  It is also fully compatible with the Alaska Quality Schools Initiative. 

Since there is a well-documented and critical need for teachers in Alaska, the addition of a new undergraduate degree to replace the B.Ed. is an important step to take in responding to this need. 

The new BA in Elementary Education provides the option for students in rural areas, as well as those on the Fairbanks Campus, to seek an undergraduate degree and teaching certificate in a much-needed profession.  The teacher shortage in rural areas, the high teacher turnover rate, and the predicted shortage in urban areas is a critical problem that the University system can, and should, respond to by providing this new degree option.

In addition to supporting the Mission of the University of Alaska, the replacement of the B.Ed. with the new BA in Elementary Education directly responds to, and supports, each of the six primary goals in the final draft of the University of Alaska Fairbanks Strategic Plan.  This is accomplished through the following:  (1) academic content requirements and the necessary collaboration across UAF departments; (2) degree requirements for on-going fieldwork in schools and communities; and (3) the built-in professional development for cooperating teachers and administrators and the required formal partnerships with schools and districts in rural and urban areas. 

Alaska's comprehensive educational reform effort--i.e., the Alaska Quality Schools Initiative--has generated an unprecedented public interest in Alaska’s educational system.  At this critical juncture in determining educational policy in the state, the University has the opportunity to make a long and lasting contribution to the state and to its children.  The high level of collaboration among UAA, UAF and UAS faculty in the development of three new undergraduate teacher education degrees, the interest and support provided by a significant number of arts and sciences faculty members, and the prospects for increased attention to, and support for, teacher preparation programs are reason to believe that the University does indeed have the will to respond to the great need to prepare teachers for our unique Alaska contexts. 

ATTACHMENT 105/7
UAF Faculty Senate #105
December 10, 2001
SUBMITTED BY CURRICULAR AFFAIRS

MOTION:
======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend the requirements for the Associate of Applied Science degree as follows:

[[  ]] = deletion
CAPS = addition

ASSOCIATE OF APPLIED SCIENCE

Associate of Applied Science degrees are awarded in specific occupational fields with emphasis on entering the job market.  This degree, usually seen as a terminal degree, can serve as the basis for additional education.  FOR SPECIFIC MAJOR REQUIREMENTS, REFER TO THE DEGREES AND PROGRAMS SECTION OF THIS CATALOG.

Note: students planning to go on to a baccalaureate degree need to work closely with their advisors and are encouraged to select courses meeting core requirements and courses designated within majors and minors.  Only those courses with an "X" designator count towards the baccalaureate core

Requirements……………………………………………..	Credits
All credits for the A.A.S. degree must be at the 100-level or above and be distributed as follows:

RELATED INSTRUCTION

Communication………………………………………..…	9
(WRITTEN COMMUNICATION)……………………..…..	6
ENGL 111X – Introduction to Academic Writing  	   	3
AND
CIOS 260 -- BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS        		3
Or
ENGL 211X – Academic Writing about Literature  		3
or
ENGL 212 – Business, Grant, and Report Writing   		3
or
ENGL 213X – Academic Writing about the Social 
		and Natural Sciences   				3
(ORAL COMMUNICATION)…………………..………....	3
COMM 131X -- Fundamentals  of Oral Comm: Group Context	3
Or
COMM 141X -- Fundamentals of Oral Comm: Public Context	3

[[Mathematics or natural science (3 credits)  			3]]
[[A math or natural science course at the 100 level or above	3]]

COMPUTATION………………………………………..….	3
ANY COURSE AT THE 100 LEVEL OR ABOVE IN MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES (MATH, COMPUTER SCIENCE, STATISTICS)		3
  OR TTCH 131 -- MAINTENANCE MATHEMATICS   		3
  OR CIOS 116 -- BUSINESS MATH USING CALCULATORS	3
  OR ABUS 155 -- BUSINESS MATH     				3
  OR HLTH 116 -- MATHEMATICS IN HEALTH CARE		3
OR
OTHER PROGRAM APPROVED DISCIPLINE-BASED COMPUTATION COURSE OR COURSES         	 						3
[[Humanities, social science, math, natural sciences or Perspectives on the Human Condition   							3]]

HUMAN RELATIONS………………………..………..….	3
ANTH 100X/SOC 100X – INDIVIDUAL, SOCIETY AND CULTURE   3
OR
ABUS 154 – HUMAN RELATIONS   				3
OR
HS 120 – CULTURAL DIVERSITY IN HUMAN SERVICES 	3
OR
ECE 245 – CHILD DEVELOPMENT   				3
OR
RHS 115 – ISSUES OF PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT 		2
AND RHS 110 – CROSS-CULTURAL BRIDGING SKILLS  	2
OR
ANL 287 – TEACHING METHODS FOR ALASKA NATIVE 
LANGUAGES     							3

Major specialty  						at least 30

Electives to total      						60

	EFFECTIVE:  	Fall 2002

	RATIONALE:  	This amendment brings the AAS degree into 
		compliance with NWASC accreditation standards by 
		adding a Human Relations component and by clarifying 
		the Computation component requirements.  Additionally, 
		it increases the computation requirement by eliminating 
		the option to take a natural science course instead of 
		computation courses.  It also improves the relevancy of 
		the degree by requiring a written composition course 
		which is application intensive.  It continues to exceed 
		accreditation standards in the Communication area.

ATTACHMENT 105/8
UAF Faculty Senate #105
December 10, 2001
SUBMITTED BY CURRICULAR AFFAIRS

MOTION:
======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend the requirements for the Associate of Arts degree as follows:

[[  ]] = deletion   
CAPS = addition

Associate of Arts

The Associate of Arts degree represents the completion of broad-based college study.  This degree may serve as a starting point for a career or a stepping stone to a baccalaureate program.  A student may earn only one A.A. degree.  

Requirements    							Credits

All credits for the A.A. degree must be at the 100 level or above, and 20 credits must be at the 200 level or above, and be distributed as follows:

Communications:  (9 credits)

ENGL 111X --Introduction to Academic Writing     		3 
ENGL 211X --Academic Writing about Literature 
  or ENGL 212-- Business, Grant and Report Writing
  or ENGL 213X--Academic Writing about the Social 
	and Natural Sciences      					3 
COMM 131X --Fundamentals of Oral Communication:  
	Group Context  
  or COMM 141X --Fundamental of Oral Communication:  
	Public Context      							 3 

Mathematics or Natural Science:  (10 Credits)
MATH 107X ---Function for Calculus** 
  or   MATH 131X -- Concepts and Contemporary 
	Applications of Mathematics    					3 
	(OR Math 200X, 201X, 202X, 272X, or any math 
	course having one of these as a prerequisite)     
One natural science course, with lab, selected from 
	the baccalaureate core   					4 
Mathematics (MATH, COMPUTER SCIENCE, STATISTICS 
	AT THE 100 LEVEL OR ABOVE) or natural science   	3 

Humanities and Social Science: (18 Credits)
ANTH 100X/SOC 100X --Individual, Society and Culture 	3 
ECON 100X/PS 100X --Political Economy    			3 
HIST 100X --Modern World History    				3 
ART/MUS/THR 200X -- Aesthetic Appreciation: 
	Interrelationship of Art, Drama and Music 
  or HUM 201X --Unity in the Arts      				3 
ENGL/FL 200X --World Literature      				3 
Humanities or social science elective    				3 
	Two semester-length courses in a single Alaska 
	Native Language or other non-English language or 
	three semester-length courses (9 credits) in American 
	Sign Language taken at the university level may 
	substitute for two of the courses above.  

Library and Information Skills:  (0-1 credit)
Successful completion of library skills competency test,
 or LS 100X, or LS 101X     						0-1 

Successful completion of the library skills competency 
test satisfies this requirement of the core curriculum, 
but does not carry degree credit.  
(It is strongly recommended that this requirement be 
completed before enrolling in the 200-level English course 
requirement or that it be completed concurrently with 
enrollment in the 200-level English core requirement.)

General Electives:  (22-23 credits)
   Any combination of courses   (Students planning to go 
   on to the baccalaureate degree are advised to select 
   courses meeting remaining core requirements, and 
   courses designated within majors and minors.)  		22-23

Electives to Total							 60 

*English 212 doesn't fulfill the second half of the written 
communication requirement for the baccalaureate degree.

**MATH 161 --Algebra for Business and Economics, is not an equivalent course for MATH 107X.  

	EFFECTIVE:  	Fall 2002

	RATIONALE:  	To clarify the mathematical science elective 
		requirements.

ATTACHMENT 105/9
UAF Faculty Senate #105
December 10, 2001
SUBMITTED BY CORE REVIEW COMMITTEE

MOTION: 
======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to accept the recommendation of the CORE Review Committee to restate the Natural Science requirement of the CORE Curriculum to allow a student to complete two 4-credit courses, with labs, from two different areas (departments) of the approved Natural Science CORE courses (e.g. Biology and Chemistry) - OR - a 2 course depth sequence.

	EFFECTIVE:  	Spring 2002

	RATIONALE:   	Students changing from majors that require 
		specific Natural Science courses to majors that allow 
		students to make their own CORE Natural Science choices 
		are regularly caught up in completing a second half (most 
		usually a depth emphasis) of a CORE sequence not needed 
		for the new major. This restatement of the requirement 
		would eliminate the most petitioned aspect of the CORE 
		Curriculum, widen student options, and maintain the 
		integrity of this important element of the CORE 
		Curriculum.

				***************

[[  ]]  = 	Deletions
CAPS = 	Additions

Baccalaureate Core

Courses used to meet core requirements may not be used to meet any other requirements for a degree.

Requirements……………………………………………..	Credits

Communication (9 credits) …………………………..	9
ENGL 111X-Introduction to Academic Writing* ………….	3
ENGL 211X-Academic Writing about Literature 
OR ENGL 213X-Academic Writing about the Social and 
	Natural Sciences     ……………………………..……..	3
COMM 131X-Fundamentals of Oral Communication: 
	Group Context OR COMM 141X-Fundamentals of 
	Oral Communication: Public Context  ……….……...	3
*ENGL 190H may be substituted.

Perspectives on the Human Condition (18 credits)..18
(Humanities and social sciences) ……………………………	18
Complete the following six courses:
ANTH 100X/SOC 100X-Individual, Society and Culture      	3
ECON 100X or PS 100X-Political Economy   			3
HIST 100X-Modern World History       				3
ART/MUS/THR 200X-Aesthetic Appreciation:
	Interrelationship of Art, Drama and Music OR 
HUM 201X-Unity in the Arts      					3
ENGL/FL 200X-World Literatures       				3
COMM 300X-Communicating Ethics OR 
   JUST 300X-Ethics and Justice OR
   NRM 303X-Environmental Ethics and Actions OR 
   PS 300X-Values and Choices OR
   PHIL 322X-Ethics        						3
OR complete 12 credits from the above courses plus two 
semester-length courses in a single Alaska Native language 
or other non-English language or three semester-length 
courses (9 credits) in American Sign Language taken at 
the university level.

Mathematics (3 credits) …………………….……….	3
MATH 107X-Functions for Calculus OR  MATH 131X-Concepts 
   and Contemporary Applications of Mathematics    		3
   OR MATH 200X, 201X, 202X, 262X, 272X or any math 
   course having one of these as a prerequisite
* MATH 161 is not an equivalent course to MATH 107X.

Natural Sciences (8 credits)  ……………………….	8
[[Complete two 4-credit courses, with labs, from approved 
natural science core courses with depth or breadth emphasis. 
Both courses must be from the same emphasis area, that is, 
either breadth or depth.]]

COMPLETE TWO 4-CREDIT COURSES, WITH LABS…………	8

EITHER FROM TWO DIFFERENT AREAS (DEPARTMENTS) 
	OF THE APPROVED NATURAL SCIENCE CORE COURSES 
	(E.G. BIOLOGY AND CHEMISTRY) - 
OR - A TWO COURSE DEPTH SEQUENCE (E.G., PHYS 103X and 
	PHYS 104X).

[[Breadth emphasis
The two courses must be in different natural sciences or 
  must be interdisciplinary in nature.
Select two courses from the following:]]
ATM 101X-Weather and Climate of Alaska  			4
BIOL 100X-Human Biology (4)
  or BIOL 103X-Biology and Society (4)
  or BIOL 104X-Natural History (4)        
  OR BIOL 105X- FUNDAMENTALS OF BIOLOGY I
  OR BIOL 106X-FUNDAMENTALS OF BIOLOGY II 			4
CHEM 100X-Chemistry and the Modern World 
  OR CHEM 103X-BASIC GENERAL CHEMISTRY
  OR CHEM 104X-BEGINNINGS IN BIOCHEMISTRY      
  OR CHEM 105X-GENERAL CHEMISTRY   
  OR CHEM 106X-GENERAL CHEMISTRY   				4
GEOG 205X-Physical Geography    					4
GEOS 100X-Introduction to Earth Science 
  OR GEOS 101X-THE DYNAMIC EARTH AND
  OR GEOS 112X-HISTORY OF EARTH AND LIFE        
  OR GEOS 120X-Glaciers, Earthquakes, Volcanoes 
  OR GEOS 125X-Humans, Earth and Environment   		4
MSL 111X-The Oceans     						4
PHYS 102X-Energy and Society 
  OR PHYS 103X-COLLEGE PHYSICS     
  OR PHYS 104X-COLLEGE PHYSICS     
  OR PHYS 115X-PHYSICAL SCIENCE I
  OR PHYS 116X-PHYSICAL SCIENCE II
  OR PHYS 175X-Astronomy 
  OR PHYS 211X-General Physics       
  OR PHYS 212X-General Physics       
  OR PHYS 213X- Elementary Modern Physics     			4

Depth [[emphasis]] SEQUENCES
[[The two courses must be sequential courses or a two-semester 
survey in the basic natural sciences (biology, chemistry, earth 
science, physics). 
Select one sequence from the following:]]
BIOL 105X-106X-Fundamentals of Biology I and II 		8
BIOL 211X-212X-Human Anatomy & Physiology I and II  	8
CHEM 103X-104X-Basic General Chemistry- 
	Beginnings in Biochemistry       				8
CHEM 105X-106X-General Chemistry   		 		8
GEOS 101X-The Dynamic Earth and
GEOS 112X-History of Earth and Life     	   			8
PHYS 103X-104X-College Physics      				8
PHYS 211X-212X-General Physics       				8
PHYS 211X-213X-General Physics/Elementary Modern Physics      8
PHYS 212X-213X-General Physics/Elementary Modern Physics      8

Library and Information Research (0-1 credit)…..	0-1
Successful completion of library skills competency test or 
LS 100X or 101X prior to junior standing        			0-1

Two writing intensive courses designated (W) and one 
oral communication intensive course designated (O) 
or two oral communication intensive courses designated 
(O/2), at the upper-division level 
(see degree and/or major requirements)  0 additional

Total Credits Required  ……………………………….	38-39

ATTACHMENT 105/10
UAF Faculty Senate #105
December 10, 2001
SUBMITTED BY GRADUATE ACADEMIC & ADVISORY COMMITTEE

MOTION:
======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to delete the MAT, Elementary.

	EFFECTIVE:  	Fall 2002 or 
				Upon Board of Regents' Approval

	RATIONALE: 	See full program proposal #21 on file in the 
				Governance Office, 312 Signers’ Hall.

				***************

Executive Summary
MAT, Elementary 

In 1999, in conjunction with the development of a new post-baccalaureate teacher education programs for elementary and secondary teachers, the School of Education decided to test a pilot program that allowed post-baccalaureate teacher education students to earn an MAT degree in conjunction with the coursework and internship required for a teacher education license.  After two years, with ongoing review and reflection of the advantages and disadvantages of the pilot MAT option (including the solicitation of a great deal of feedback from cooperating mentor teachers and administrators), the School of Education suspended admission to its MAT programs in spring 2001.  

In place of the MAT, the School of Education designed an option for post-baccalaureate teacher education students to pursue the more respected and more rigorous M.Ed.  This option allows post-baccalaureate students to use 15 of the required 27 credits from their licensure program to satisfy one-half of the 30 credits required for an M.Ed. Degree in Curriculum and Instruction.  

This new option has been in place for two years and the response from students, university faculty and school district personnel has been very positive.  In contrast to the MAT degree, the M.Ed. provides the option for students who complete our post-baccalaureate teacher education programs to continue their graduate work with us, and it provides the opportunity for the School of Education to provide professional development and support for beginning teachers.  The M.Ed. can also be used as a foundation for a Ph.D. because of its requirements for research and the completion of a research project or a thesis.  

ATTACHMENT 105/11
UAF Faculty Senate #105
December 10, 2001
SUBMITTED BY GRADUATE ACADEMIC & ADVISORY COMMITTEE

MOTION:
======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to approve a Master's of Software Engineering degree program.  

	EFFECTIVE:  	Fall 2002 or 
				Upon Board of Regents' Approval

	RATIONALE: 	See full program proposal #18 on file 
		in the Governance Office, 312 Signers’ Hall.

		In forwarding this request for approval, the Graduate
		Academic & Advisory Committee notes the 
		importance of allocating a further (i.e., third) faculty
		position with this new program to ensure its viability.  

				***************

Master's of Software Engineering

The Masters in Software Engineering is meant to prepare students for careers as software practitioners, i.e., those whose primary job is to develop or maintain software.  It this goal is well met, then the program will directly benefit software practitioners and their employers.  

The main reason for the existence of the field of software engineering is to seek and find solutions to various software practitioners' performance problems.  Thirty-two years of software engineering efforts have produced good results in software engineering technical areas such as tools, process, re-use, testing, et cetera and in management areas such as software project management.  Unfortunately the fruits of this labor are often not known to or used by software practitioners.  Thus the UAF Software Engineering program goal is to help improve the performance of software practitioners through knowledge, understanding and use of software engineering principles and practices.  

This program has been a successful track in the computer science graduate program since its inception in 1993.  The software engineering track in the Computer Science Master's program was originally intended as an independent program, but was developed as a track for budgetary reasons.  We are now proceeding with the separation of this track into a separate program according to our original plan.  The program is not otherwise being changed from its already successful form.  Indeed, the graduates of this program have been successful in obtaining employment.  

ATTACHMENT 105/12
UAF Faculty Senate #105
December 10, 2001
SUBMITTED BY FACULTY AFFAIRS

FACULTY AFFAIRS MEETING REPORT 

DATE:	 Monday, 12 November 2001,  Begin: 1300 hrs, Runcorn Conference Room

Committee Members Present:  Mike Davis, Rural Development, Dillingham; Joan Leguard, Philosophy & Humanities; Peter McRoy (Chair), SFOS

Guests:  Bret Luick and Richard Seifert, CES; Richard Caufield. Chair, Master Plan Committee; Godwin Chukwu, VP Faculty Senate

Agenda
The usual order of business was waived to concentrate on 2 major issues, the representation of CES faculty on the Senate and the Master Plan review. 

CES faculty representation on the Faculty Senate (Luick/Seifert):
	Dr. Luick reported that the consolidation of the Cooperative Extension Service (CES now CES) into the College of Rural Alaska resulted in the loss of traditional direct Faculty Senate membership from CES.  He sought assistance of Faculty Affairs Committee to find a way to reinstate its Senate representation.  Dr. Chukwu noted that when SME, SALARM and SOM were incorporated into CNRDM each unit retained its individual faculty representation on the Senate.  This unit representation was handled internally by the CNRDM at the time of reorganization.  The CNRDM situation is a precedent for CES.  Dr. Luick will seek resolution of the problem internally in CRA with consultation with Faculty Affairs and the Senate Administration Committee.  Faculty Affairs expressed appreciation to Drs. Luick and Seifert for their efforts in resolving this issue. 

Master Plan Review (Caufield):
	Dr. Caufield presented and overview of the latest draft Master Plan and cited the Goals and associated actions that were driving the process.  The 5 goals are: (1) To create an efficient and attractive campus environment to learning; (2) to improve community access to the UAF campus; (3) to make vehicle circulation simple and direct; (4) to promote safe and efficient travel through the campus for pedestrian and other non-motorized uses; and (5) to highlight natural assets of campus and its unique northern environment.  Dr. Caufield then gave a short history of how the current plan had developed with the engineering consultants.
Faculty Affairs members raised several issues with the latest draft of the Master Plan.  These issues include, but are not limited to, the following:  a failure to consider the security risks imposed by darkness, a poor road plan that will only increase faculty, staff and student commuting between buildings, the elimination of small, but needed, parking lots, proposed locations of new buildings on the West Ridge that will increase congestion and create new access problems, a failure to consider alternative campus access routes to alleviate congestion and traffic, proposed shuttle bus routes that would increase commute time between West Ridge and lower campus, and an unrealistic preoccupation with pedestrian access. 
Dr. Caufield presented some of the thought and justifications that created the existing plan but many considerations raised by the Committee were left unresolved.  The Committee will discuss these concerns and make recommendations at its December meeting.

Needs Assessment for Faculty Development—Consultant here in December
	The committee received a note from Dr. Joy Morrison requesting assistance in arranging faculty development meetings with Dr. Dan Wheeler during the week of 3 December.  No new ideas for meetings were forthcoming.

Continuing Old Business Items:
1.	Classified Research (McRoy/Smith)
2.	Regulation on Research Misconduct (McRoy)
3.	UAF Budget process (McRoy/Smith)
4.	Revision of Emeritus Status Policy (McBeath)
5.	Spouse Appointment Policy (Davis)
6.	Regulation 03.01.01; Faculty, Staff & Student Governance (all)
Review of policy from Staff Alliance
7.	Early Tenure (Leguard)

Next meeting : 3 December 01

ATTACHMENT 105/13
UAF Faculty Senate #105
December 10, 2001
SUBMITTED BY GRADUATE ACADEMIC & ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Graduate Academic & Advisory Committee (GAAC) Meeting Report
November 6, 2001, 10-11 am, Chancellor's Conference Room, Signers' Hall 330

Present: Gayle Gregory, Dennis Stephens, Sandra Bond, Susan Henrichs, Ed Bueler, Eric Rexstad, Maribeth Murray, Hajo Eicken, Norm Swazo, Ann Tremarello
Guests: Mike Sfraga

I.  Old Business
A.  Trial course requests:
NORS694 (rapporteur: Sandra Bond): Since this is part of the Major Program Change proposed for Northern Studies, it will be discussed in conjunction with the other request pertaining to this change.

B.  Revision of graduate scholastic and academic standing criteria: Response from Eric Muehling with regards to usage in catalogue is in line with earlier assessment by Ed Bueler and Eric Rexstad. The committee decided to go ahead with suggesting changes to simplify and rectify existing policy and wording. Hajo will contact Ron Illingworth to coordinate with Curricular Affairs Committee. Due to the current work load, item will be deferred.

C.  Mike Sfraga, Director of Program Development gave a brief overview of the status of on-line delivery of courses, integration and systemwide implementation. The discussion revealed several items pertaining to graduate academic policy that may have to be considered in this context (does implementation of online delivery constitute course change?  online courses currently not assessed as part of on-line program consolidation, evaluation of online course delivery success, potential representation of GAAC, etc.).  Discussion will continue.

II.  New Business
Scheduling of program changes, new programs and other major items before committee was discussed; Hajo will invite Dept Chairs & Head of Academic Council to next set of GAAC meetings.

-----------------

Graduate Academic & Advisory Committee (GAAC) Meeting Report
November 20, 2001, 9.30-11.15 am, Chancellor's Conference Room, Signers' Hall 330

Present: Gayle Gregory, Joe Kan, Elke Richmond, Dennis Stephens, Chuen-Sen Lin, Sandra Bond, Ed Bueler, Eric Rexstad, George Minassian, Lillian Corti, Hajo Eicken
Guests: Larry Duffy, David Newman, Brenton Watkins, Pete Knoke

I.  Old Business
N/A

II.  New Business

1.  Proposal for Major Program/Degree Requirement Change, Atmospheric Physics (AP)
   Brenton Watkins (Chair, Dept. Physics) summarized the rationale and background for a major program change request to implement a Degree Program in AP (not perceived as a new degree but resulting out of development of Atmospheric Sciences (AS) Program which was taken out of the Dept of Physics and is currently administered by CSEM, leaving historical core of atmospheric physics components of the program disenfranchised; adding a concentration in AP to the Physics Program was not deemed sufficient by the Dept. based on recruiting and curriculum considerations). David Newman (Head Academic Council CSEM) stressed the importance of offering variety to potential students, and added that personal initial concerns to move ahead with request potentially interfering with development of AS Program have largely diminished as the latter program is gaining momentum. Larry Duffy (Chair, Atmospheric Sciences Program) reviewed development of AS Program, with majority of students in atmospheric physics branch in the 90's, but increasing momentum for other aspects of AS. Joe Kan stressed role of GAAC in assessing and ensuring academic quality of programs, i.e. focussing on the academic content. 
   In discussing the requested program change, several GAAC members raised concerns that the current proposal entails more than a program change, given that AS Program remains intact and request would result in two programs (AS and AP), such that in its present form it would undercut BOR Policy as well as the spirit of assessment of program viability and quality through faculty review (cf. BOR requirements for New Program as compared to Major Program Change). Brenton Watkins stressed that the present proposal was based on advised route of action and was not intended to undercut the process. However, concern for current and future students in a well-established program (AP portion of former comprehensive AS Program) led to request for new program rather than adding of concentration.
   In order to allow GAAC members more time to probe and evaluate the relevant issues, a decision on the request was deferred to the next GAAC meeting.  However, the Committee decided to stress and convey the following points to the Faculty Senate (and Administration involved in the development of an AS Program):
	(1) During the meeting, most if not all parties recognized that interdisciplinary programs (such as a broader AS Program) are both attractive and potentially optimal solutions to the current dilemma of dissolution or broadening of disciplinary boundaries on the one hand, and the legitimate concerns over academic program oversight, allocation of students and resources (with both scarce at times at UAF) on the other. Yet, neither party at this stage recognized the joint administration of a degree program in AS with a concentration in AP and Atmospheric Chemistry under the purview of the different departments as a viable option. Considering that other proposals before the GAAC point to similar problems (and acknowledging that these problems could be further fuelled by the ever-increasing degree of distance-delivery of programs), it may be prudent for faculty and administration to consider in more detail both the problems and opportunities facing UAF in this context.
	(2) The current proposal was difficult to evaluate because of entanglement of administrative, academic and policy issues. For example, it was noted that the transfer of the AS Program out of the responsibility and purview of the Physics Dept. into CSEM may have constituted a major program change, subject to evaluation and response by the GAAC. This particular item will be addressed by the Committee at a later meeting. At the same time, research into current BOR Policy and preliminary consultation with GAAC could have clarified and streamlined the process for all involved.
	(3) Unanimous agreement was expressed over the importance of recruitment and retention of outstanding graduate students and the critical role played by individual programs in maintaining the current high academic standard.  Considering current and future development of education, sciences and engineering it is ironic that possibly as a direct result of these genuine concerns UAF might run the risk of losing rather than gaining lustre in the eyes of both current and future graduate students, in particular if the current issue is any indication of what is still to come in other disciplines. 

2.  Proposal for a New Degree Program, Master's Degree in Software Engineering (MSE)
   Pete Knoke gave an overview of rationale and background for the New Degree Program Proposal (substantial need for graduates with background in program design and implementation; development of Computer Science (CS) and industry are likely to fuel such demand in the future; MSE would be focussed program in contrast with broader CS program, earlier splitting of CS in technical/non-technical track unfortunate; original plan was to do away with concentration for SE parallel with introducing MSE program proposal, but due to hang-up proposal was delayed; 20 students over the past few years in the SE track). 
   In the discussion it was questioned by Joe Kan and committee members to what an extent this program qualifies for the title "Engineering".  This has been looked at by faculty in the Electrical Engineering Dept. who provided a memorandum, deeming the use of the term adequate (after additional research in industry) and overall in support of the program.  While the initiative and level of activity of the proponents of the new degree program are impressive, the GAAC questioned whether a degree program could rest solely on the shoulders of two faculty (Knoke and Nance).  Oblique references to potential additional support were not deemed enough, in particular in light of the current job market situation and issues relating to faculty attraction/retention in the CS field.  The GAAC expressed that viability of the program would require more specific input and revisions along the following lines: expressed statement by CSEM Dean to provide a third faculty position in support of the program, specific assessment of program enrollment and output (cf. BOR Policy Guidelines) as well as implementation.  Pete Knoke will provide a revised version of the proposal for the next GAAC meeting for reconsideration.

------------------

Graduate Academic & Advisory Committee (GAAC) Meeting Report
November 27, 2001, 9.30-11.15 am, Chancellor's Conference Room, Signers' Hall 330

Present: Gayle Gregory, Joe Kan, Elke Richmond, Dennis Stephens, Chuen-Sen Lin, Sandra Bond, Ed Bueler, Eric Rexstad, Lillian Corti, Colin Read, Maribeth Murray, Susan Henrichs, Madeline Schatz, Norm Swazo, Hajo Eicken
Guests: J. Kleinfeld, G. McBeath, G. Holt, B. Cooper, L. Duffy, C. Basham, L. Kaplan, A. Berge, S. Jacobson

I. Old Business
N/A

II. New Business

(1) Course requests
  The following course requests were approved:
CE 640-Prestressed Concrete - New Course (#14)
MIN 647 - Advanced Underground Mine Design (#31) - Drop Course
MIN 682 - Computer Aided Mine Design II - Stack with existing MIN 482 (#33)
MIN 482 - Computer Aided Mine Design II - Change Course, stack with MIN 682 (#85)
   The course request for MIN 601 - Application of Artificial Neural Networks (#32, new course) was judged premature at this point, since the trial course (approved in Oct meeting by GAAC) for this offering had not yet been taught, rendering evaluation of success and potential improvements of trial course impossible.  The committee recommends re-submission of course request after completion of trial course with evaluation of course success (including addressing the issue of potential duplication of courses offered in other departments).

(2) Request for Major Program Change: Northern Studies, Concentration in Global Environmental Policy
   Jerry McBeath summarized rationale and background for major program change request (demand based on recognized concerns and developments in circum-Arctic and globally, combination of resources and expertise with existing NORS graduate program, after submission to CLA Academic Council followed up with assessment and review that guided present form of proposal).  Judy Kleinfeld stressed synergistic components and overall strengthening of both PS and NORS components of project. 
   Gayle Gregory pointed out that current language in catalog does not reflect existing concentrations (such as in general Northern Studies) and that this should be rectified and routed through GAAC. 
    Further discussion included the long-term development of program (cf. wording in proposal) and future options. Particular emphasis was placed on the role of the GAAC in avoiding internal competition (the non-constructive kind), which required that the proponents supply more information on program assessment and development (to be provided by G. McBeath, possibly bolstered by supporting earlier proposal review). While it could not be resolved to what an extent the proposal requires implementation of an additional faculty-line, this issue will be addressed in the revised proposal (see also item 4 below). With respect to resources, distance delivery is an important component of proposed change. Stacking of courses (all new courses that are requested for program are stacked) chosen as a means of streamlining program, but it was noted that course requests need to distinguish sufficiently between undergraduate and graduate components. 

(3) Proposal for New Program in Applied Linguistics
   Lillian Corti (with additional information from C. Basham as proponent) provided summary review of proposal (proposal timely in light of needs for AK native language instruction, English as a second language and foreign language linguistics program development, very strong faculty support, program evolved out of interdisciplinary program students with needs assessed by survey). 
   It was inquired to what an extent the program would overlap or draw away from the Education program.  This was not deemed a problem due to size of Ed program and different target audience for the proposed linguistics program (i.e., not focussing on literacy and schooling aspects), although direct contact of School of Education about program was deemed beneficial.  The requirement of a teaching certificate for K-12 teachers is unproblematic as most applicants requiring such would come with certificate from undergraduate degree.
   Administration of the program was discussed and it was suggested that identification in catalog as Applied Linguistics might complicate administration and further evolution of program in Linguistics Dept.
   Required program resources, in particular statement proposal regarding faculty position and support, were discussed and it was requested that specific support of the faculty line be indicated by the CLA Dean (alternatively GAAC would forward request subject to approval by Dean/Provost, see also item 4 below).
   Dennis Stephens pointed out that resources required for program extend beyond faculty positions etc. and that library resources are potentially critical in such requests (though the present proposal took exemplary approach in ensuring proper consideration).

(4) Program viability and resource allocation
  The evaluation of the two proposals listed above and earlier ones included an assessment of program viability in light of available or potentially available resources (faculty positions etc.).  Joe Kan pointed out that final approval rests with the Chancellor (and input from Provost) limited resources need not concern committee (in contrast with academic strength of program).  Norm Swazo would bring up this point in Administrative Committee Meeting with Provost.  Members of GAAC pointed out that nature of the program development process (such as unrealistic reliance on President's Initiative Process, feedback between successful proposal review and search of financial program support etc.) may not allow for a disregarding of resource allocation issues in the context of overall viability and program development.  It was noted in particular, that President's Initiative Process and Academic Program Review and Implementation are currently decoupled to an extent that might impede both program development and proposal submission. 

----------------------

Graduate Academic & Advisory Committee (GAAC) Meeting Report
November 29, 2001, 9.30-11.15 am, Kayak Room, Rasmuson

Present: Gayle Gregory, Joe Kan, Elke Richmond, Dennis Stephens, Chuen-Sen Lin, Sandra Bond, Lillian Corti, Doug Reynolds (stand-in), Maribeth Murray, Susan Henrichs, Madeline Schatz, Norm Swazo, Hajo Eicken
Guests: G. McBeath, L. Duffy, H. Sankaran, J. Gladden, M. Ehrlander

I. Old Business
(1) Request for Major Program Change: Northern Studies, Concentration in Global Environmental Policy
  A memo from G. McBeath and J. Kleinfeld was forwarded to GAAC this morning, addressing items discussed on Tuesday (program assessment, impacts, concentration areas; 20-25 students expected to be enrolled in concentration). In discussing requests for new courses (PS447/647, PS454/654, PS455/655, PS456/656, PS458/658) associated with program change, issues that the committee felt were not clarified sufficiently at this stage are: unclear and potentially insufficient distinction between graduate and undergraduate course portions (with all courses but one in the concentration stacked), linkage of courses to Northern Studies program was not immediately obvious, references to previous assessments of program would have benefited from supplying (in excerpt or summary) conclusions/ outcomes. As the GAAC had not had time to adequately review the new information provided (in particular the substantial changes with respect to the two additional concentrations included since Tuesday) it was decided to defer the discussion.

(2) Proposal for New Program in Applied Linguistics
  As the committee had not yet received revisions of the original proposal (addressing issues discussed at Tuesday's meeting, i.e., title of program, identification of administrative responsibility), it was decided to defer further discussion of the request and associated courses.

(3) Proposal for a New Degree Program, Master's Degree in Software Engineering (MSE)
  A revision of the original program request, taking into account changes discussed at the Nov 6 meeting had been prepared by Pete Knoke and was forwarded to the GAAC. These revisions and a memo from the Dean of CSEM addressed the concerns raised earlier, including the assurance of adequate support of the program through allocation of an additional faculty position to a new MSE program.  In light of these and earlier considerations, the committee unanimously approved to forward the proposal to the Faculty Senate.

II. New Business

(1) Course/Program requests
The following course requests and associated program changes were approved:
COMM602-Qualitative Communication Research Methodologies (New Course, #1)
Program Change COMM: replace COMM682 with COMM602 (#2)
Program Change ED: Add special education endorsement (#20)
Program Deletion ED: MAT-Elementary (#21)
COURSE CHANGE:  BA 643 - Marketing Management (#22)
COURSE CHANGE:  BA 683 - Seminar in Marketing (#23)
DROP COURSE:  BA 604 - The Legal Environment of Business (#24)
DROP COURSE:  BA 610 - Production/Operations Management (#25)
DROP COURSE:  BA 625 - Principles of Finance (#26)
NEW COURSE:  BA 670 - International Management in the European Context (#27)
NEW COURSE:  BA 671 - International Management:  Industry and Functional Differences (#28)
PROGRAM CHANGE:  MBA, Business Administration - Changes to admissions; replace 600 level foundation courses with 300-level; comments; effective Fall 2002. (#29)
PS460W stack with NORS660 (#14)

ATTACHMENT 105/14
UAF Faculty Senate #105
December 10, 2001
SUBMITTED BY CORE REVIEW

CORE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING, NOVEMBER 21, 2001.

Here are results of our meeting.  All members save for the student member were present, as were ex officio members Sue McHenry and Wanda Martin.  Gayle Gregory sat in to discuss wording of the motion and the Committee thanks her both officially and personally for her help.

You will find several matters listed below.

The CORE Review Committee has voted to forward a motion to the Senate regarding the Breadth/Depth requirement in the Natural Sciences area.

Jill Faudree informed the Committee that the Mathematics Department is taking up the matter of MATH161 and will have some result for us in the spring semester.

The Committee nominated and elected a new Chair who will take charge of the Committee in spring semester, 2002.  Doug Schamel was unanimously voted into the position.

CORE Review approved Physics 115 and Physics 116 as options for the Natural Sciences CORE.

The Committee voted the current Chair the power of the Committee during the time from now until spring semester's first meeting for petition approval purposes (a standing practice).

Jin Brown, Chair
CORE Review Committee

ATTACHMENT 105/15
UAF Faculty Senate #105
December 10, 2001
SUBMITTED BY CURRICULUM REVIEW COMMITTEE

CURRICULUM REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES - NOVEMBER 

November 6, 2001

Present:  Robert Arundale, CLA; Vicki Koehler, CRA; David Verbyla, SALRM; Carol Barnhardt, SOEd.; Gerald Plumley, SFOS; Doug Reynolds, SOM; Gang Chen, SME; Gayle Gregory, Registrar's Office; Thom Walker, Student; Pete Pinney, Chair 

Guests:   John Lehman, Office of International Programs

AGENDA: 
	Introductions
	Review meeting schedule (Tuesday, Nov 13th, Friday, Nov 16th, 
		Tuesday, Nov 20th)
	Mapping out docket review:
		November 13: 1-13; 47-67;
		November 16: 27-46; 76-93
		November 20: 14-26; 71-74

John Lehman introduced the BA and minor for Global Studies and how it came about. 

These are two independent programs aimed at different audiences. The Global Studies minor was developed by Joy Morrison last year after consultations with PS, Sheri and others. The minor is inside CLA. After one course was tested last year, input was that anything with Global should be part of PS. Prof. Morrison chose Global Studies to avoid any confusion. The major was developed only as a second BA program, primarily marketed to students not seeking a BA (BS, BBA) as offered at Oregon State. A BA student would not be stopped from taking this. As part of the academic plan, these should have international experience in their specific fields. Students in sciences or business typically do not have that exposure. The committee asked questions. Objections to the proposal were introduced. After discussion, John was invited back for next meeting. The committee will begin with the Global Studies proposal.

-------------------------

November 13, 2001

Present:  Robert Arundale, CLA; David Newman, CSEM; Vicki Koehler, CRA; David Verbyla, SALRM; Carol Barnhardt, SOEd.; Doug Reynolds, SOM; Gang Chen, SME; Cindy Hardy, Developmental Studies; Gayle Gregory, Registrar's Office; Pete Pinney, Chair 

Guests:   John Lehman, Office of International Programs; Ken Barrick, Geography; Jackie Fenno, Geography

AGENDA:
	Review # 1-13; 47-67;
	Begin with #10 and #11, #68, #69, #70 (Carol B)
	#1-9, 12, 13 (Vicki K.), #67 (David V.), #47-57 (Bob A.), 
	#58-66 (David V.)

Discussion of the Global Studies program focused on impact on other programs. Concerns about the minor were not the same for the major in Global Studies. Minor sent back to Joy Morrison, noting to talk with the Geography Department to look at options. BA approved to move on to Curricular Affairs Committee with changes in name to External Studies and a market analysis with student names. 

Vicki presented and the committee approved #1-7, not 8, 9 (sent back to Joy as part of Global Studies). Vicki also presented #67 FYI for the committee so that we could consider the changes to HST beginning next meeting on Friday.

-------------------------

November 16, 2001

Present:  Robert Arundale, CLA; Vicki Koehler, CRA; David Verbyla, SALRM; Doug Reynolds, SOM; Gang Chen, SME; Cindy Hardy, Developmental Studies; Gayle Gregory, Registrar's Office; Thom Walker, Student; Pete Pinney, Chair 

Guests:   Joy Morrison, Journalism; Donna Anger, Office of International Programs

AGENDA:
	Begin with #10 and #11 (Carol B)
	Review #12, 13 (Vicki K.); #67 (David V.); #47-57 (Bob A.); 
	#58-66 (David V.)
	Review #27-37 (Doug R); #38-46, 75 (Gang C.); #76-80 (Pete P.)

Joy Morrison talked about the history of the minor and consultation with other departments in CLA. She added LING 216: Languages of the World. The minor has nine required classes, plus two new courses that will serve as intro and capstone. It could be a feeder into a major once students take some classes in this interdisciplinary option. Discussion focused on international emphasis.

The committee approved the minor and the courses associated with it (#8, 9 and 10). Vicki presented the changes in the HST program and the proposed emphases in what will be called Human Services. The committee approved #47-67 with changes to #48 (repeat once), #50 (beef up syllabus), #56 (one credit), #58 (one credit), #59 (one credit), #60 (one credit and list HSV 125 as pre-requisite), #64 (one credit), #65 (one credit), and #66 (three credits). Gayle noted the changes to the catalogue copy. The committee also approved changes for #38-46 with a correction on #44 to not repeatable and a note on #45 to correct the number of credits to 31. The committee also approved #75, 77, and 78, but held approval on #76, 79 and 80 until Pete found out some additional information.

-------------------------

November 20, 2001

Present:  Robert Arundale, CLA; Vicki Koehler, CRA; David Newman, CSEM; Gerald Plumley, SFOS; Doug Reynolds, SOM; Gang Chen, SME; Cindy Hardy, Developmental Studies; Gayle Gregory, Registrar's Office; Pete Pinney, Chair 

Guests:  Joe Hines, Instructor (BA 254) 

AGENDA:

	Joe explained how the course had evolved and the plans he wanted to implement. The committee asked if he could submit a new syllabus and we would conditionally approve. The committee approved all but #14-21, 76, 79, 80 and decided to meet again in two weeks to finish up those few remaining proposals. Notes on changes were given to Governance.

ATTACHMENT 105/16
UAF Faculty Senate #105
December 10, 2001
SUBMITTED BY FACULTY APPEALS AND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE

MEETING:  November 16, 2001

Members Present:  Michael Schuldiner, Jerry Lipka, Joan Moessner (Chair), Gang Chen, Mitch Roth

Since so many were absence, we used the time as a working committee.  We agreed with the comments contained in the memo from former Chancellor O'Rourke  Mitch summarized the Senate's discussion of the present censure and vote of no confidence policy and the need for developing a new one. Since the present policy does not define censure, that was the first question committee members had:  what does it mean?  We decided that it would be best to invite Norm Swazo to meet with us and discuss the matter with the committee so that we can proceed to do our work more effectively.

--------------------------------
FACULTY APPEALS 7 OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
Monday, December 3, 2001

Pressent:  Peter Storz, Julie Riley, Santanu Khataniar, Michael Schuldiner, Jerry Lipka, Oscar Kawagley, Victoria Moessner, Mitch Roth 
Absent:  Gang Chen, Glenn Juday, Brian Himelbloom

Some members of the committee have not received the document we are to revise: "The UAF Faculty Senate passed ...Meeting #17 on March 9, 1990" with O'Rourke's memo.

Norm clearly reviewed and laid out the problems inherent in the now suspended procedure (policy?) through a series of questions and examples.

By next time, the committee would like to know what UAA does and what other universities do.

There are two areas that need to be clarified:  1. procedures for a group or unit to express displeasure (censure, no confidence) of an administrator;  2. procedures for one faculty member against another faculty member.

ATTACHMENT 105/17
UAF Faculty Senate #105
December 10, 2001
SUBMITTED BY FACULTY DEVELOPMENT, ASSESSMENT & IMPROVEMENT

FDAI minutes, November 6, 2001, 11:30-12:30. 

Members present:  Abel Bult, Channon Price, Tom Robinson, George Charles, Joy Morrison, Jim Collins, Linda Curda, Ann Wilson
Guests:  Godwin Chukwu

I.  	Call to order.  Minutes accepted from October 9, 2001 meeting.

II.  	Discussion regarding early tenure - Godwin addressed the group regarding our on-going discussion.  He will refer back to the Provost for clarification of the issue.  Committee has requested information from Hild Peters regarding numbers of faculty who have stood for early and mandatory tenure.  The committee's main concern is the role of early tenure in retention of faculty.   At what point can sustained creativity and production be judged? 

III.	New Business
A.  Visit by Dan Wheeler, Consultant, Dec. 3-7.  Meeting with Faculty Development and Improvement committee--possible date Dec. 4, 11:30-12:30.   Rural faculty setting up date to audioconference--possible date Dec. 7, 1:00-2:00

B.  Faculty Development discussion
New faculty are e-mailed weekly regarding faculty development workshops.  Should faculty development concentrate on individual issues of promotion and tenure, provide remedial mentoring  and target specific weaknesses?  Should faculty development include grant writing workshops?  These are some issues the faculty development survey may answer.  Joy will e-mail short version of faculty development survey.

C.  Channon Price report
	a.  Joy and Shannon attended meeting in October.  They noted that many universities are moving to establish a full-time faculty development office on campuses.  There is much to be done but we do not have to reinvent the wheel; resources available include Guides to Faculty Development, videos, Instructional guides for TA's.
	b.  Center for Teaching Excellence
This office would serve several purposes - house faculty development resources, promote solid development of junior faculty