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 #112
Monday, December 9, 2002
1:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m.
Wood Center Carol Brown Ballroom

1:00	I	Call to Order – Godwin Chukwu      			  5 Min.
		A.	Roll Call
		B.	Approval of Minutes to Meeting #111
		C.	Adoption of Agenda

1:05	II	Status of Chancellor's Office Actions 		  5 Min.
		A.	Motions Approved:  
			1.	Motion to amend the AA degree requirements.
			2.	Motion to amend the Guidelines for the 
				Evaluation Process of Administrators.
			3.	Motion to approve the establishment of a 
				Senator of the Year Award.
		B.	Motions Pending:  none

1:10	III	Resolution of Recognition of the UAF Men's  	  5 Min.
		Basketball Team, submitted by Administrative Committee
		(Attachment 112/1)

1:15	IV	Remarks by Provost P. Reichardt			10 Min.

1:25 	V	A. 	Faculty Concerns of rural campuses   	20 Min.
		B.	Public Comments/Questions 			  5 Min.

1:50	VI	Governance Reports
	A.	President-elect's Comments - P. Pinney		  5 Min. 
	B.	President's Report - G. Chukwu     			  5 Min.
	C.	Staff Council - L. Ledlow 				  5 Min.
	D.	ASUAF - D. Miller / GSO - J. Holmes	    		  5 Min.
	E. 	Eva Kopacz, Faculty Liaison				  5 Min.

2:15	VII	New Business						60 Min.
	A.	Motion to amend the GCC Procedures,  submitted by 
		Administrative Committee (Attachment 112/2)
	B.	Motion to amend Section 3 (Article V: Committees, 
		Permanent) of the Bylaws, submitted by Developmental 
		Studies (Attachment 112/3)
	C.	Motion to delete the B.A. in Human Services, submitted 
		by Curricular Affairs (Attachment 112/4)
	D.	Motion to approve a B.S. in Computer Engineering, 
		submitted by Curricular Affairs (Attachment 112/5)
	E.	Motion to approve a Minor in Environmental Politics 
		submitted by Curricular Affairs (Attachment 112/6)
	F.	Motion to amend the Local Advanced Placement Credit 
		for Foreign Language, submitted by Curricular Affairs 
		(Attachment 112/7) 
	G.	Motion to amend the A.A.S. degree requirements,  
		submitted by Curricular Affairs (Attachment 112/8)
	H.	Motion to amend the Certificate program requirements,  
		submitted by Curricular Affairs (Attachment 112/9)
	I.	Motion to delete the M.A.T., Secondary,  submitted 
		by Graduate Academic & Advisory Committee 
		(Attachment 112/10)
	J.	Motion to delete the M.A.T., Secondary Licensed Teachers 
		submitted by Graduate Academic & Advisory Committee 
		(Attachment 112/11)
	K.	Motion of support for revisions to the Regents' policy & 
		draft regulations for the selection of Distinguished 
		University Professor, submitted by Administrative 
		Committee (Attachment 112/12)
	M.	Resolution on the Dean of the Graduate School position, 
		submitted by Faculty Affairs (Attachment 112/13)

3:15		***BREAK***						10 Min

3:25	VIII	Discussion Items   					10 Min.
	A.	Ad Hoc Committee on Review of UAF's Academic 
		Development Plan
	B.	Recommendations on Senator of the Year Recognition 

3:35	IX	Committee Reports 					15 Min.
	A.	Curricular Affairs - R. Illingworth (Attachment 112/14)
	B.	Faculty Affairs - P. McRoy
	C.	Graduate Academic & Advisory Committee – M. Murray
	D.	Core Review - D. Schamel
	E.	Curriculum Review - G. Holton (Attachment 112/15)
	F.	Developmental Studies - J. Weber (Attachment 112/16)
	G.	Faculty Appeals & Oversight - P. Layer  (Attachment 112/17)
	H.	Faculty Development, Assessment & Improvement – A. Bult-Ito 
		(Attachment 112/18)
	I.	Ad Hoc Committee on Unit Criteria - G. Holton 
		(Attachment 112/19) 

3:50	X	Members' Comments/Questions			  5 Min.

3:55	XI	Adjournment

ATTACHMENT 112/1
UAF Faculty Senate #112
December 9, 2002
SUBMITTED BY ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE

RESOLUTION OF RECOGNITION

WHEREAS, The UAF men's basketball team made history as the first NCAA Division II team to win an eight-team Division I tournament in the history of college basketball, and

WHEREAS, Several UAF players were formally recognized for their exceptional performances, and

WHEREAS, The UAF men's basketball staff and players exhibited their dedication to teamwork and sportsmanlike conduct, and

WHEREAS, Throughout the tournament the entire team and staff were outstanding representatives of UAF, now

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, That the UAF Faculty Senate wishes to recognize the outstanding achievement of the UAF Men's Basketball Team.

												
							President, UAF Faculty Senate

								December 9, 2002

ATTACHMENT 112/2
UAF Faculty Senate #112
December 9, 2002
SUBMITTED BY ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE

MOTION:
======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend the UAF Governance Coordinating Committee (GCC) Procedures for the purposes establishing a new standing committee for Diversity and Tolerance.  The GCC Procedures shall be amended as indicated below.

         EFFECTIVE:  Immediately

         RATIONALE:  The promotion of diversity and tolerance at UAF 
		transcends any single group of constituents, and the activity 
		extends beyond a limited timeframe.  The GCC has 
		determined the need to address topics of discrimination, 
		freedom of speech, and a multi-cultural campus environment 
		can be served best by leveraging support from all UAF 
		governance bodies.

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

Deletions =  [[  ]]
Additions = CAPS

	GOVERNANCE COORDINATING COMMITTEE PROCEDURES

ARTICLE V	Committees

Sect. 1	The standing committees of the UAF Governance 
		Coordinating Committee shall include:  

	Intercollegiate Athletics Committee
	Rural Affairs Committee
	Health Issues
	DIVERSITY AND TOLERANCE

Sect. 2
	A.  Standing committees shall have at least one 
		representative from each of the governance 
		constituencies, exception will be made when agreed 
		upon by all constituencies.
	B.	Terms of all committee members will be one year
		for students and two years for faculty and staff.
	C.	Committee chairs will be elected from and by the 
		respective committees.
	D.	Committee chairs shall forward committee 
		business to the UAF Governance Coordinating 
		Committee for disposition, except when limited by 
		University of Alaska regulations.  
	E.	Policy items from the standing committees must
		be forwarded to the individual governance bodies
		for action.
	F.	In addition to the committees' specific charges, 
		the primary responsibility of the committees are 
		formulation and oversight of university-wide 
		policies under the purview of each committee.  
	G.	Committees will meet as needed during the academic
		year to fulfill their duties.
	H.	The chairs of the standing committees will report
		recommendations at the [[monthly]] UAF Governance
		Coordinating Committee meetings.  
	
Sect. 3	Standing Committees Charges

	A.	Intercollegiate Athletics Committee

		The charge of the Intercollegiate Athletic 
		Committee shall be to:

		1.	exercise oversight of the direction of the 
			Intercollegiate Athletics Program.  
		2.	investigate compliance with NCAA and 
			conference regulations.
		3.	participate in the evaluation of 
			intercollegiate programs

	B.	 Rural Affairs

		The charge of the Rural Affairs committee shall be to:

		1.	oversee the general welfare of the UAF 
			community not residing on the Fairbanks 
			campus. 
		2.	monitor all activities affecting compliance 
			with the Rural College mission statement of 
			the University of Alaska Fairbanks.

	C.	Health Issues Committee

		The charge of the Health Issues committee shall be to:

		1.	address health issues which affect the work 
			environment.
		2.	coordinate efforts with the Health Center, 
			Fire Department, Risk Management, and Public 
			Safety to find solutions to health issues.

	D.	DIVERSITY AND TOLERANCE COMMITTEE

		THE CHARGE OF THE DIVERSITY AND TOLERANCE 
		COMMITTEE SHALL BE TO:

		1.	ADDRESS ISSUES REGARDING THE PROMOTION 
			OF DIVERSITY AND TOLERANCE OF THE UAF 
			CAMPUS AND AFFILIATED RURAL SITES. 
			
		2.	RECOMMEND POLICIES, PROCEDURES, AND 
			ACTIVITIES TO PROMOTE NON-DISCRIMINATION, 
			HARASSMENT PREVENTION, FREEDOM OF SPEECH, 
			AND MULTI-CULTURAL AWARENESS.

		3.	COORDINATE EFFORTS WITH THE OFFICE OF 
			MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS, THE ASSISTANT TO 
			THE CHANCELLOR FOR CAMPUS DIVERSITY AND 
			COMPLIANCE, UAF HUMAN RESOURCES, AS WELL 
			AS OTHER OFFICES OR GROUPS NEEDED TO 
			ACCOMPLISH THE COMMITTEE’S MISSION.  

ATTACHMENT 112/3
UAF Faculty Senate #112
December 9, 2002
SUBMITTED BY DEVELOPMENTAL STUDIES

MOTION:
======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend Section 3 (Article V: Committees, Permanent) of the Bylaws pertaining to the Developmental Studies Committee membership.

CAPS - Addition
[[ ]]   - Deletion

PERMANENT

	2. 	The Developmental Studies Committee will include 
		one representative from each of the following 
		units:  Northwest Campus; Chukchi Campus; 
		Kuskokwim Campus; Bristol Bay Campus; Interior-
		Aleutians Campus; College of Science, Engineering 
		and Mathematics:  Science Department (Biology, 
		Chemistry, Geology, or Physics), and Mathematics 
		Department; the College of Liberal Arts:  English 
		Department, and Cross Cultural Communications 
		Department; the College of Rural Alaska 
		Developmental Studies Division; Rural Student 
		Services; Advising Center; STUDENT SUPPORT 
		SERVICES PROGRAM; and two representatives 
		from the Tanana Valley Campus.  

		The Developmental Studies Committee shall 
		consider policies concerning developmental 
		education:  programs, courses, instructional 
		development, evaluation, and assessment.  This 
		committee will function as a curriculum council 
		review committee for all developmental studies 
		courses.  Discipline based developmental courses 
		will be reviewed by the appropriate college 
		curriculum council before submission to this 
		committee for review and coordination.

	EFFECTIVE:  	Immediately

	RATIONALE:  	SSSP is a component area 
		and should be included as a member.  

ATTACHMENT 112/4
UAF Faculty Senate #112
December 9, 2002
SUBMITTED BY CURRICULAR AFFAIRS

MOTION:
======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to delete the B.A. in Human Service (HMSV).  

	EFFECTIVE:  	Fall 2003 or 
			Upon Board of Regents' Approval

	RATIONALE: 	See full program proposal #23 on file in the 
			Governance Office, 312 Signers’ Hall.

			Students no longer accepted into the program 
			after 1987, last graduate was in 1994; all but 
			two advising courses have been dropped.

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

Executive Summary
B.A., Human Service

The program was initiated in 1986 as an option for those interested in working in the human services.  Insofar as human services program is not constrained by accreditation standards, it was seen at the time as a viable option for rural students who had limited course offerings.  The social work program is constrained only in maintaining educational standards by its accreditors.  The social work program has been successfully delivering its curriculum to rural sites since 1987.  It was difficult to explain to students and others the differences between the two programs.  There was neither need nor resources to deliver two programs to train social service providers.  Therefore it was decided in 1987 that students would no longer be accepted in the Human Services Program.  The last graduation from the Human Services program was in 1994.  

ATTACHMENT 112/5
UAF Faculty Senate #112
December 9, 2002
SUBMITTED BY CURRICULAR AFFAIRS

MOTION:
======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to approve a B.S. in Computer Engineering degree program.  

	EFFECTIVE:  	Fall 2003 or 
				Upon Board of Regents' Approval

	RATIONALE: 	See full program proposal #119 and 120 on 
				file in the Governance Office, 312 Signers’ Hall.

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

Executive Summary
Bachelor of Science in Computer Engineering

Computer engineering is a relatively new discipline that merges the fields of electrical engineering and computer science.  The discipline of computer engineering (CompE) educates engineers in the theory, design, technology and application of computing devices.  This discipline draws on hardware (electrical engineering) and software (computer science) concepts to design and implement computer hardware and software systems to solve problems.  The understanding of both software and hardware allows the computer engineer to view the design and development of hardware and software as two intimately linked parts of one activity.  A computer engineer might be involved in fundamental research, hardware design and fabrication, software system design, or systems integration.  Applications of computer engineering can be found in communication systems, the entertainment industry, mobile robot systems, motor vehicle systems, instrumentation, manufacturing processes, intelligent electronics, and many others.  

The graduates of the computer engineering program will fill technological needs in Alaskan industry that are increasing, and that are currently filled by immigrants to the state.  The computer engineering program will retain Alaskan students in state.  The program will provide a high tech foundation for supporting state government, existing state industry, and high tech or computer start up companies, fostering economic growth.

ATTACHMENT 112/6
UAF Faculty Senate #112
December 9, 2002
SUBMITTED BY CURRICULAR AFFAIRS

MOTION:
======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to approve a minor in Environmental Politics. 

	EFFECTIVE:  	Fall 2003 or 
			Upon Board of Regents' Approval

	RATIONALE: 	See full program proposal #22 on 
			file in the Governance Office, 312 Signers’ Hall.

			Uses existing courses to provide a focused minor 
			requiring 15 credits--requires PS 101, recommends 
			PS 100X as part of the Core, and 12 credits of 400 
			level courses.

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

Executive Summary
Minor in Environmental Politics

Students taking this minor will explore the local, national and international contexts within which key political decisions about the environment are made.  Courses examine philosophical and theoretical perspectives on the environment; the ways in which different countries address issues of resource development and environmental regulation; international environmental laws, treaties and institutions; the relationship between environmental protection and national security; the relationship between politics and environmental science; and the interplay of environmental concerns and the international political economy.  

ATTACHMENT 112/7
UAF Faculty Senate #112
December 9, 2002
SUBMITTED BY CURRICULAR AFFAIRS

MOTION:
======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend the Local Advance Placement Credit for Foreign Languages (p. 15, 2002-2003 catalog) as follows:  

[[  ]]  = Deletion
CAPS = Addition

Foreign Language

After completing A FOREIGN LANGUAGE COURSE TAUGHT AT UAF (102-431) [[the course in which you were placed (above 101)]] and earning a "B" grade or higher, you may ask to receive [["bonus]] credit for the two [[immediately]] preceding [[prerequisite]] courses[[, if any]].  However, credit cannot be awarded for such courses if university credit has already been granted for them (for example, through College Board Advanced Placement national tests or credit transfer from another college).   [[Bonus]] Credit will not be awarded IF THE COURSE TAKEN IS A CONVERSATION COURSE, [[for]] special topics course[[s]], individual study course[[s]], [[literature or culture courses]] OR FOREIGN LANGUAGE COURSE TAUGHT IN ENGLISH.  YOU MUST SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR FOREIGN LANGUAGE CREDIT FORM FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES TO THE OFFICE OF ADMISSIONS AT THE END OF THE SEMESTER IN WHICH YOU COMPLETED YOUR COURSE.

	EFFECTIVE:  	Immediately

	RATIONALE:  	Foreign Language's request to grant credits 
		for prior courses for students who begin at the 400-level 
		(rather than the 300-level, as is the current procedure) is 
		to allow for the increasing number of native speakers, 
		especially in Spanish.  These students do not need to take 
		200- and 300- level language review classes, and should be 
		able to start in the 400-level literature and culture 
		courses.  But since the 200- and 300- level courses are 
		required for the major, native speakers of the language 
		currently have to enroll for those courses.

				***********

APPLICATION FOR FOREIGN LANGUAGE CREDIT

The application for Foreign Language Credit may be submitted after satisfying the following criteria:

After completing a foreign language course taught at UAF (between 102-431) and earning a “B” grade or higher, you may apply to receive credit for the 2 preceding courses.  However, credit cannot be awarded for such courses if university credit has already been granted for them (for example, through College Board Advanced Placement national tests or credit transfer from another college).   Credit will not be awarded if the course taken is a conversation course, special topics course, individual study course, or foreign language course taught in English.  You must submit an Application for Foreign Language Credit form from the Foreign Languages Department to the Office of Admissions at the end of the semester in which you completed your course.

NAME  _____________________________________________
Please print      (Last)   	(First)                                (Middle)

Signature: ________________________   Date:  ___________

Student ID Number  _______-_______-_______

Semester       _______Fall	_______Spring  	Year __________

Course Completed __________________________________________________

Grade Received: _______________

Credit to be received for the following course(s):

___________________________________________________
Name of course  								Credit

___________________________________________________ 
Name of course  								Credit

___________________________________________________
Signature of Instructor 						Date

ATTACHMENT 112/8
UAF Faculty Senate #112
December 9, 2002
SUBMITTED BY CURRICULAR AFFAIRS

MOTION:
======

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

	EFFECTIVE:  	Fall 2003

	RATIONALE:  	This amendment adds courses to the Related 
		Instructional areas of Computation and Human Relations.  
		Additionally, it brings requirements from various portions 
		of the catalog together that affect the AAS Degree.

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

[[  ]] = 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 credits)		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)		3
(Oral Communication)		3
COMM 131X -- Fundamentals  of Oral Comm:  Group Context (3)
OR 
COMM 141X -- Fundamentals of Oral Comm:  Public Context (3) 	3

Computation (3 credits)	3
Any course at the 100 level or above in mathematical sciences (math, computer science, statistics) (3)
or ABUS 155 -- Business Math (3)
or CIOS 116 -- Business Math Using Calculators (3)
or HLTH 116 -- Mathematics In Health Care (3)
or TTCH 131 -- Maintenance Mathematics (3)
OR DEVM 105 – INTERMEDIATE ALGEBRA (3)
OR ECE 117 – MATH SKILLS FOR EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION (3)
OR HSV 117 – MATH SKILLS FOR HUMAN SERVICES (3)
Or other program approved discipline-based computation course [[or courses]] OR DISCIPLINE-BASED COURSES WITH EMBEDDED COMPUTATION CONTENT TO TOTAL	3

HUMAN RELATIONS (3 credits)	3
ANTH 100x/Soc 100x – Individual, Society And Culture (3)
Or ABUS 154 – Human Relations (3)
Or ANL 287 – Teaching Methods For Alaska Native Languages (3)
Or ECE 245 – Child Development (3)
Or HSV 120 – Cultural Diversity In Human Services (3)
Or  RHS 115 – Issues Of Personal Development (2)
And RHS 110 – Cross-Cultural Bridging Skills [[2]](1)
OR ED/PSY 245 – CHILD DEVELOPMENT (3)
OR HLTH 106 – HUMAN BEHAVIOR IN HEALTH CARE (3)
OR
OTHER PROGRAM APPROVED DISCIPLINE-BASED HUMAN RELATIONS COURSES OR DISCIPLINE-BASED COURSES WITH EMBEDDED HUMAN RELATIONS CONTENT TO TOTAL	3[[-4]]

Major specialty	at least 30

Electives to total			60

[[Note:  Students planning to go on to the baccalaureate degree need to work closely with their advisors and are encouraged to select courses meeting core requirements and courses designated with majors and minors.]]

*ENGL 212 does not fulfill the second half of the written communication requirement for the baccalaureate degree.  

ATTACHMENT 112/9
UAF Faculty Senate #112
December 9, 2002
SUBMITTED BY CURRICULAR AFFAIRS

MOTION:
======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend the requirements for the Certificate Programs as follows.

	EFFECTIVE:   	Fall 2003

	RATIONALE:  The accreditation self-study and the subsequent 
		accreditation visit identified that UAF has no stated 
		certificate requirements in the catalogue for related 
		instruction nor any statement of a standard for the 
		inclusion of related instruction in certificate programs to 
		guide the design of curricula.  Consequently, it has not 
		been widely recognized that there is such a requirement.  
		This motion corrects that deficiency.  Additionally, it 
		brings requirements from various portions of the catalog 
		together that affect the Certificate Programs.

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

[[  ]] = deletion
CAPS = addition

CERTIFICATE PROGRAMS

Certificate programs vary in length; however, you can usually complete them in one year.  CERTIFICATES ARE AWARDED IN SPECIFIC OCCUPATIONAL FIELDS WITH EMPHASIS ON ENTERING THE JOB MARKET.  THESE CERTIFICATES CAN SERVE AS THE BASIS FOR ADDITIONAL EDUCATION AND ARE THE FIRST STEP TOWARDS AN ASSOCIATE OF APPLIED SCIENCE DEGREE.  FOR SPECIFIC MAJOR REQUIREMENTS, REFER TO THE DEGREES AND PROGRAMS SECTION OF THIS CATALOG.

Only degree requirements in effect within five academic years prior to your graduation date for a certificate may be used.  You are considered enrolled in your degree program when you complete the appropriate degree student registration procedure.  If you do not enroll for a semester or more, or if you enroll through the non-degree process, you are not considered enrolled as a degree student during that time.  IF YOUR DEGREE PROGRAM IS DELIVERED COLLABORATIVELY WITHIN THE UA SYSTEM THEN THE CREDITS YOU EARN FROM EACH UA INSTITUTION WILL BE COUNTED TOWARD FULFILLMENT OF THE DEGREE REQUIREMENTS AND FULFILLMENT OF THE MINIMUM INSTITUTIONAL RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS.

YOU MAY ENROLL IN ANY COURSE FOR WHICH YOU ARE ELIGIBLE.  TO EARN A CERTIFICATE, YOU MUST FORMALLY BE ADMITTED AND YOU MUST EARN AT LEAST 30 CREDITS, INCLUDING TRANSFER CREDIT.  FIFTEEN SEMESTER HOURS MUST BE RESIDENCE CREDITS.  YOU MUST HAVE A CUMULATIVE GRADE POINT AVERAGE OF AT LEAST 2.0 IN ALL WORK, AS WELL AS IN YOUR MAJOR.  PROGRAMS OF STUDY FOR WHICH CERTIFICATES ARE GRANTED MUST CONTAIN A RECOGNIZABLE BODY OF INSTRUCTION IN THE PROGRAM-RELATED AREAS OF 1) COMMUNICATION, 2) COMPUTATION, AND 3) HUMAN RELATIONS.  ADDITIONAL TOPICS WHICH MAY BE COVERED AS APPROPRIATE INCLUDE SAFETY, INDUSTRIAL SAFETY, AND ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS.  INSTRUCTION IN THE RELATED INSTRUCTIONAL AREAS MAY BE EITHER EMBEDDED WITHIN THE PROGRAM CURRICULUM OR TAUGHT IN BLOCKS OF SPECIALIZED INSTRUCTION.  EACH APPROACH, HOWEVER, WILL HAVE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED CONTENT THAT IS PERTINENT TO THE GENERAL PROGRAM OF STUDY.

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
[[To enroll in a certificate program, and before receiving a certificate, you must formally be admitted.  To earn a certificate, you may enroll in any course for which you are eligible.  To earn a certificate, you must earn at least 30 credits, including transfer credit.  Fifteen semester hours must be residence credits.  You must have a grade point average of 2.0 in all work, as well as in your major.]]

[[Only degree requirements in effect within five academic years prior to your graduation date for a certificate may be used.  You are considered enrolled in your degree program when you complete the appropriate degree student registration procedure.  If you do not enroll for a semester or more, or if you enroll through the non-degree process, you are not considered enrolled as a degree student during that time.]]

RELATED INSTRUCTION
COMMUNICATION		2-3
ENGL 111X – INTRODUCTION TO ACADEMIC WRITING (3)
OR
CIOS 160 – BUSINESS ENGLISH (3)
OR
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)
OR
COMM 131X -- FUNDAMENTALS  OF ORAL COMM:  GROUP CONTEXT (3)
OR
COMM 141X -- FUNDAMENTALS OF ORAL COMM:  PUBLIC CONTEXT (3)
OR
DEVS 104 – UNIVERSITY COMMUNICATIONS (1-3)
OR
DEVS 105 – INTENSIVE READING DEVELOPMENT (3)
OR
OTHER PROGRAM APPROVED DISCIPLINE-BASED COMMUNICATION COURSE OR DISCIPLINE-BASED COURSES WITH EMBEDDED COMMUNICATION CONTENT TO TOTAL	2-3

COMPUTATION	2-3
ANY COURSE AT THE 100 LEVEL OR ABOVE IN MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES (MATH, COMPUTER SCIENCE, STATISTICS) (3)
OR ABUS 155 -- BUSINESS MATH (3)
OR CIOS 116 -- BUSINESS MATH USING CALCULATORS (3)
OR DEVM 105 – INTERMEDIATE ALGEBRA (3)
OR ECE 117 – MATH SKILLS FOR EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION (3)
OR HLTH 116 -- MATHEMATICS IN HEALTH CARE (3)
OR HSV 117 – MATH SKILLS FOR HUMAN SERVICES (3)
OR TTCH 131 -- MAINTENANCE MATHEMATICS (3)
OR
OTHER PROGRAM APPROVED DISCIPLINE-BASED COMPUTATION COURSE OR DISCIPLINE-BASED COURSES WITH EMBEDDED COMPUTATION CONTENT TO TOTAL	2-3

HUMAN RELATIONS	2-3
ANTH 100X/SOC 100X – INDIVIDUAL, SOCIETY AND CULTURE 
OR
ABUS 154 – HUMAN RELATIONS (3)
OR
ANL 287 – TEACHING METHODS FOR ALASKA NATIVE LANGUAGES (3)
OR
ECE 245 – CHILD DEVELOPMENT (3)
OR
ED/PSY 245 – CHILD DEVELOPMENT (3)
OR
HLTH 106 – HUMAN BEHAVIOR IN HEALTH CARE (3)
OR
HSV 120 – CULTURAL DIVERSITY IN HUMAN SERVICES (3)
OR
RHS 115 – ISSUES OF PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT (2)
AND RHS 110 – CROSS-CULTURAL BRIDGING SKILLS (1)
OR
OTHER PROGRAM APPROVED DISCIPLINE-BASED HUMAN RELATIONS COURSE OR DISCIPLINE-BASED COURSES WITH EMBEDDED HUMAN RELATIONS CONTENT TO TOTAL.	2-3

MAJOR SPECIALTY	AT LEAST 21

ELECTIVES TO TOTAL			30

*ENGL 212 DOES NOT FULFILL THE SECOND HALF OF THE WRITTEN COMMUNICATION REQUIREMENT FOR THE BACCALAUREATE DEGREE.  

ATTACHMENT 112/10
UAF Faculty Senate #112
December 9, 2002
SUBMITTED BY GRADUATE ACADEMIC & ADVISORY COMMITTEE

MOTION:
======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to delete the M.A.T., Secondary.

	EFFECTIVE:  	Fall 2003 or 
				Upon Board of Regents' Approval

	RATIONALE: 	Admission was suspended in 2000; new option 
		in the M.Ed. has replaced this degree.  See full program 
		proposal #28 on file in the Governance Office, 312 
		Signers’ Hall.

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

Executive Summary
M.A.T., Secondary

In 1998, in conjunction with the development of new post-baccalaureate teacher education programs for elementary and secondary teachers, the School of Education developed a secondary 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 three years, with ongoing review and reflection of the advantages and disadvantages of the MAT option (including the solicitation of a great deal of feedback from mentor teachers and administrators), the School of Education suspended admission to its MAT programs in 2000.  

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 30 credits from their licensure program to satisfy one-half of the 30 credits required for a 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 requirement for research and the completion of a research project or a thesis.  

ATTACHMENT 112/11
UAF Faculty Senate #112
December 9, 2002
SUBMITTED BY GRADUATE ACADEMIC & ADVISORY COMMITTEE

MOTION:
======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to delete the M.A.T., Secondary Licensed Teachers.

	EFFECTIVE:  	Fall 2003 or 
				Upon Board of Regents' Approval

	RATIONALE: 	New option in the M.Ed. has replaced the need 
		for this degree; no students currently in program.
		See full program proposal #29 on file in the Governance 
		Office, 312 Signers’ Hall.

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

Executive Summary
M.A.T., Secondary Licensed Teachers

In 1999, in conjunction with the development of new post-baccalaureate teacher education programs for elementary and secondary teachers, the School of Education developed:  (1) a secondary MAT degree for teachers who held either BA/BS degrees and (2) B.Ed. degrees, and additionally were licensed K-12 teachers, to pursue a MAT degree to enhance their content knowledge and receive current educational philosophy and pedagogy courses.  After four years, with ongoing review and reflection of the advantages and disadvantages of the MAT option, during which only one student applied for either option and then choose to complete a different degree, the School of Education made a decision to delete both options of this degree.  

In place of the MAT, the School of Education offers the option to pursue the more respected and more rigorous M.Ed.

The M.Ed. provides the opportunity for the School of Education to provide professional development and support for teachers.  The M.Ed. can also be used as a foundation for a Ph.D. because of its requirements for research and for the completion of a research project or a thesis.  

ATTACHMENT 112/12
UAF Faculty Senate #112
December 9, 2002
SUBMITTED BY ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE

MOTION:  
======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to recommend that the proposed Revised Regents' Policy and draft Regulations 04.04.040.A.1.e(1) - "Distinguished and University Professors" as submitted by the Faculty Alliance be accepted.

        EFFECTIVE:      Immediately

        RATIONALE:       The Faculty Senate discussed the revised draft 
		of the Regents' Policy and proposed Regulations for the 
		selection of Distinguished University Professor, forwarded 
		to the Faculty Senate for review, and moves to support 
		the draft, with its recommendation that it be accepted by 
		the Faculty Alliance.

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

REVISED REGENTS POLICY 04.04.040.A.1.e.(1)

Distinguished [[and]] University Professors. [[Tenured a]] Appointment as Distinguished [[Teaching Professor, Distinguished Research Professor, Distinguished Service Professor or]] University Professor may be given by action of the Board of Regents on recommendation of the faculty and concurrence of the Chancellor and the President.  THE SELECTION CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES ARE SET FORTH IN UNIVERSITY REGULATION.

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

PROPOSED REGULATION 04.04.040.A.1.e. (1)

DISTINGUISHED UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR*

The title "distinguished professor" is bestowed on members of the faculty who have distinguished themselves as exemplary teachers, scholars, and public servants, and who are individuals having extraordinary international importance and recognition.  The designation of "distinguished professor" is established by the Policies of the Board of Regents.  The title "Distinguished University Professor" is a lifetime award/honor, meaning that the award lasts as long as the professor is employed at the University of Alaska.

University-wide Criteria

The title "Distinguished Professor" is extended to recognize the outstanding contributions of University of Alaska faculty members to their academic disciplines.  Candidates recommended for a distinguished professorship must demonstrate accomplishments in exemplary teaching and/or distinguished scholarship or creative work.

The very nature of the title "distinguished" implies that there will be a limited number of faculty holding this title.  It is intended to signify a select group of faculty members who are leaders in their respective fields as attested to by national or international recognition and/or their significant public service achievements.  Candidates for the honor of being selected as Distinguished University Professor should have attained the rank of tenured full professor.

Procedures

1. 	Each campus will develop its own internal procedures for 
	nominating distinguished professorships, consistent with Regents 
	policy.  Such nominations must be reviewed by the dean of the 
	appropriate school or college, and must be screened by a 
	committee of senior faculty peers who will advise the chancellor 
	on the merits of each proposal.  Each MAU may develop its own 
	minimum criteria for nominations.

2. 	Following campus review and approval by the chancellor, 
	recommendations and supporting documentation will be 
	submitted to the President's Office. The following materials 
	will accompany each recommendation:

	A.	Evidence concerning the distinguished accomplishments 
		of the individual’s tripartite or bipartite responsibilities, 
		including letters from faculty peers both within and 
		outside the institution who are qualified to judge the 
		accomplishments of the individual;

	B.	Evidence concerning the national and, where appropriate, 
		international recognition of the candidate including national 
		and international honors and awards, and significant 
		original contributions to his/her discipline; and

	C.	Evidence concerning the public service achievements of the 
		candidate as appropriate to the discipline at interest.

3.	A systemwide committee of the Alliance shall review all the 
	proposals and shall forward their recommendations on to the 
	President.

4.	Recommendations approved by both the Alliance and the 
	President will be transmitted to the Board of Regents for action, 
	accompanied by appropriate documentation.  If the President 
	does not approve a campus recommendation, he will transmit his 
	reasons to the Alliance and the campus chancellor.  

5.	This is a single type of appointment and the number should be 
	capped by the MAU and the president.  Since this is selective, the 
	number should not exceed five percent of the faculty.

6.	This award includes, at a minimum, a plaque and special 
	cords to be worn with their graduation regalia, as well 
	as all the rights, honors and privileges thereto.

ATTACHMENT 112/13
UAF Faculty Senate #112
December 9, 2002
SUBMITTED BY FACULTY AFFAIRS

RESOLUTION:
==========

WHERAS, In order to support the UAF strategic plan, the UAF academic development plan, and UAF’s aspirations as the nation’s northernmost Land, Sea, and Space Grant institution, the university needs a strong graduate school headed by a full-time dean, and 

WHEREAS, the Faculty Senate believes that it would be a serious mistake to replace the existing Dean of the Graduate School position with a new Vice Provost for Graduate and Instructional Affairs and Dean of the Graduate School position, and

WHEREAS, A full-time Dean of the Graduate School with responsibilities dedicated to graduate education and research, who is the product of an aggressive external search, will best serve graduate education and research at UAF, now 

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, That the Faculty Senate proposes the following:

1.	The proposed plan to eliminate the existing full-time Dean of the Graduate School position should be abandoned. 
2.	The proposed plan to create a new Vice Provost for Graduate and Instructional Affairs and Dean of the Graduate School position should be abandoned.
3.	The University should implement an immediate external search for a full-time Dean of the Graduate School in order to fill the existing position.

ATTACHMENT 112/14
UAF Faculty Senate #112
December 9, 2002
SUBMITTED BY CURRICULAR AFFAIRS

Curricular Affairs Committee Meeting
Report

The Curricular Affairs committee held audioconferenced meetings on 5 & 19 Nov 2002 from 1130am to 1 pm.  Members present included Mike Hannigan, Wanda Martin, David Barnes, Eduard Zilberkant, Carol Barnhardt, James Gladden, Gary Holton, William Schneider, Gayle Gregory, Ron Slominski, Shannon Uzzell, and Ron Illingworth.  Guests included Susan Blalock representing Dean Morrow.

All meetings were audioconferenced as some members of the committee are from outside Fairbanks.

The committee welcomed Shannon Uzzell, the new student representative, and are looking forward to her participation with this committee.  

The committee addressed the following issues:

1.	The committee approved a proposed new minor in Environmental Politics and forwarded it to the Faculty Senate for approval.
2.	The committee approved a change renaming the Low Grade Report for freshmen students to the Freshmen Progress Report and requiring that the report be provided to students at all UAF campuses.
3.	The committee approved a proposal from the Foreign Language Department to amend the Local Advanced Placement Credit option currently in place.  The change cleans up language and provides a form for use by students applying for this option.
4.	The committee approved a new B.S. in Computer Engineering and forwarded it to the Faculty Senate for approval.
5.	The committee approved the deletion of the B.A. in Human Services and forwarded this to the Faculty Senate.
6.	The committee approved changes to the AAS degree related instruction areas adding several courses to the listing.  The changes have been forwarded to the Faculty Senate for approval.
7.	The committee approved a statement of Certificate related instruction requirements which build to the AAS degree.  This document was forwarded to the Faculty Senate for approval.
8.	The committee approved a change to course compression for 500-level courses establishing a policy that they not be compressed into fewer than two days per credit.  This policy proposal has been forwarded to the Faculty Senate.
9.	Several new items have been referred to the committee for action
	a.	The need to discuss contact/credit hours requirements for internships and practicums.
	b.	A request to address contact hour requirements for on-line courses.

10.	The committee discussed several new issues 
	a.	Summer Sessions student credit enrollment policy.  After extensive discussion the committee determined that current Summer Sessions policy regarding maximum credit was reasonable and appropriate and that exceptions should be handled on a case by case basis.  Current policy limits registrations to 1-1/4 weekly credit hours during any single week.  A weekly credit hour is equal to course credit divided by course length (in weeks).
	b.	Mandatory placement – forwarded by the Developmental Studies Committee
	c.	Academic Disqualification Policy.  A subcommittee was established to recommend wording changes to the existing policy to provide additional clarification of Senate intent.

The next meeting of the Curricular Affairs Committee is scheduled for 17 December, 2002 .

Respectfully submitted
Ronald D. Illingworth, Chair

ATTACHMENT 112/15
UAF Faculty Senate #112
December 9, 2002
SUBMITTED BY CURRICULUM REVIEW

CURRICULUM REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES - Nov 8, 2002

Present: Thomas Riccio (CLA), Zorana Lazarevic (CSEM), Steve Cysewski (CRA), Gerald Plumley (SFOS), Debbie Moses (DVEM), Gayle Gregory (Registrar's Rep.), Gary Holton (chair)

Zorana presented course and degree proposals from SALRM, SFOS, SOM, SME.

Proposals accepted unconditionally: #136, 138, 139, 158, 160, 162, 163, 164

Proposals held pending further clarification:

#137 -- Request for natural science designator does not have approval from CSEM. Recommend dropping natural science designator. Also, this is a stacked course, but the extra graduate requirements consist solely of an "oral presentation".

#140 --  This is a program change which drops a course (NRM 310) from the core degree requirements. The only justification offered for this change is the lack of an instructor for the course.  While this proposal may be sound, the stated justification is not.

#159 -- Needs clarification regarding whether STAT 401 should be kept as an elective for those students who do not take it as part of the core degree requirements. (Given approval of #158, which replaces FISH 380 and FISH 384 with the single course FISH 388, it was also suggested that SFOS submit an additional program change to reflect FISH 388 in the degree requirements.)

#161 -- Several technical issues detract from this proposal:  
(i) Credit hours. Syllabus specifies 28 hours lecture, 35 lab.  This is at most 3 credits, not the 4 credits requested in the proposal.
(ii) Prerequisites. Biology course should be listed as a prereq.
(iii) Cross-listing. Syllabus does not define extra work for grad students.

#167 -- this is a new course proposal (number has been changed to PETE/MIN 100). Also being reviewed by core committee.  Proposal looks fine, but request for social science designator must be approved by CLA, which it has not. If Pet Eng. is willing to remove social science designator, course could be approved forthwith.  However, there is some question as to how useful this course would be were it to receive neither core status nor social science designator.

Next scheduled meeting is Friday, Nov 15. Proposals scheduled for review include: #1-29 (CLA); #98-107, 34, 40, 114, 115 (Health Sciences plus misc. CRA); #116-135 (CSEM).

Proposal review schedule will be revised to accommodate travel schedules and availability of committee members.

------------------------------------------------------------
Minutes of Curriculum Review Committee - Nov. 15, 2002

Here's a summary of the current status of course and degree proposals being considered by the Curriculum Review Committee.

Proposals approved unconditionally:

#1-24, 26-29
#34, 40, 98,101,102,104,105,106,107,115
#136, 138, 139, 140, 158, 160, 162, 163, 164

Proposals approved conditionally:

#99 -- pending clarification of credit-hour distribution
#100 -- pending clarification of credit-hour distribution
#103 -- pending clarification of prereq requirements (Gayle)
#114 -- conditional approval based on pending approval university-wide 
	Certificate program changes by Curricular Affairs committee
#159 -- clarification of STAT 401 elective
#161 -- clarification of credit hours issues and other technicalities

Proposals held for further input and discussion:

#25 (SWK 470) -- awaiting input from Vicki Koehler on possible conflicts with existing HSV courses

#137 -- awaiting CSEM approval of natural science designator

#165, #166 (Mining Engineering Exit Exam) -- need to resolve whether passing course should depend on passing exam

#167 -- awaiting input from core review committee; proposer does not want course if core status not approved

------------------------------------------------------------
Minutes of Curriculum Review Committee Meeting - 11/18/2002

Present: Carol Barnhardt (SoE), Dave Verbyla (SALRM), Thomas Riccio (CLA), Zorana Lazarevic (CSEM), Gerald Plumley (SFOS), Debbie Moses (DVEM), Gayle Gregory (Registrar's Rep.), Gary Holton (chair)

There were concerns expressed about unprofessional conduct by persons who are contacted on behalf of the committee in order to seek clarifications about proposals. The committee agrees that this is very inappropriate. The chair will contact the relevant persons to reiterate the mission and purview of the Curriculum Review committee and to request cooperation with such information requests.  The chair will also address these concerns to the president of the Faculty Senate and request appropriate action.  It was suggested that all committee members be careful to preface any requests for information with the fact that they are acting on behalf of the Curriculum Review committee.

Proposals approved at today's meeting:

#165,166
#116-121,123-133
GRAD #8,15,19-24  -- no issues from undergrad perspective

Proposals approved conditionally at today's meeting:

#122 -- missing signature page, no documentation of n designator (checked with Sheri after the meeting -- this one is okay.)

Proposed discussed and held for further input:

#55-97 (EMS) -- will ask Mike McGowan to next meeting

#134,135 -- statistics degree: Gayle will seek clarification of catalog wording as regards use of automatic Math minor to satisfy degree requirement

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

Minutes of Curriculum Review Committee Meeting - 11/25/2002

Present: Carol Barnhardt (SoE), Steve Cysewski (CRA), Thomas Riccio (CLA), Debbie Moses (DEV), Gayle Gregory (Registrar's rep.), Gary Holton (chair), Gang Chen (SME), Zorana Lazarevic (CSEM), Gerry Plumley (SFOS)

Guests: Godwin Chukwu, Clara Johnson, Ron Illingworth, Karen Ladegard, Roger Norris-Tull

The committee will schedule an additional meeting Monday, Dec 2, 9:30-11:30.

Godwin Chukwu, Faculty Senate President, discussed the resolution of issues concerning the committee's interactions with SALRM representatives.

The committee next approved two outstanding proposals from SALRM which had previously been conditionally approved: #137 and #161.  Proposal #137 now has paperwork from CSEM approving the natural science designator.  The committee also received an updated syllabus for #161.  For #161 the proposer has requested an additional prerequisite of "one general biology class".  Contact hours have been changes to 20 hrs. lecture + 20 hrs. lab per week.  Credit hours changed to 4.

Mike McGowan discussed the intent of the proposed revisions to the EMS and FIRE curriculum. Most of the changes were originally submitted as "minor" changes. However, the changes include incorrect credit-hour distributions, which were corrected by governance.  Since changes to credit-hour distribution constitute major changes, these proposals were transformed to major changes, but the proposals did not include the required syllabus.  Those proposals which did include a syllabus included only a rough boiler-plate sketch or course outline.  Mike brought syllabi for all of the EMS and FIRE courses; these appear to be very complete and current.  He explained that the syllabi included with the proposals are part of the national standard curriculum, which UAF is playing a role in shaping.  The committee approved all of the EMS and FIRE proposals and requested that Mike also submit a written statement in lieu of  the missing syllabi.

The committee approved #25, a new course SWK 470, after noting objections from several Human Services faculty.  While the committee acknowledges that there may be some overlap in subject area between the proposed course and an existing course, HSV 305, the committee feels the proposed course differs substantially in both the methodological approach and course requirements.

Karen Ladegard, Ron Illingworth and Clara Johnson described the proposed Educator: Paraprofessional (EDPA) program.  It was clarified that the program is not intended to articulate fully into a B.A. program.  It was suggested that language alluding to this be removed from the proposal.  Concern was expressed about the availability of the courses and program.  The program will be available throughout the UAF region.  Courses will be offered as demand warrants at various locations and by distance.  Many of the courses will be delivered by school district personnel as teacher in-services.  These will be repeatable. Karen will work with Gayle to insure just which courses are repeatable and for how many times they may be repeated. There was also some concern expressed as to what faculty would be responsible for the program.  The list included with the proposal includes just about anyone who might teach courses which would be taken by students in the program.  It was explained that it is not at this time possible to identify a core group of faculty who would be assigned to the program.  Initially, a coordinator would be hired, then as the program evolves additional faculty would likely be assigned.  The committee will continue discussion of the EDPA proposal at it's next meeting.

--------------------------------------------------------------
Minutes of Curriculum Review Committee Meeting - 12/02/2002

Present: Carol Barnhardt (SoE), Steve Cysewski (CRA), Thomas Riccio (CLA), Debbie Moses (DEV), Gayle Gregory (Registrar's rep.), Gary Holton (chair), Zorana Lazarevic (CSEM)

Guests:  Ron Illingworth

Zorana reports that the proposer of #159 has submitted the additional requested proposals.  Sheri may have these already in governance office.

Regarding the Statistics program change (#134), the propose accepts the catalog language suggested by Gayle indicating that the math minor can count as the minor requirement for the statistics degree.  We can thus forward #134 and #135.

Much of the meeting was devoted to discussing the proposed EDPA certificate and degree. Ron Illingworth joined the meeting by audio for this discussion. Overall the committee sees the EDPA as highly recommended program which addresses important needs.  The committee identified several key issues which it suggests be revised in the proposal.

--clear identification of program coordinator position and responsibilities of that position
--inclusion of organizational chart for personnel associated with EDPA program
-- identification of location ("home") of program within CRA structure (likely social science)
--clear statement of articulation with B.A.
--clarification of repeatability of courses and number of credits possible for each course (note that first time is not a repeat)
--statement that course content guidelines will be developed in order to assist standardization of curriculum
--clarification of minor inconsistencies within and across course proposals

Carol Barnhardt will work with Ron Illingworth on these suggested revisions.

Proposals #30-33,35-39,108-113 were presented by Gary and approved by the committee without undo discussion.  Gayle has noted extensive changes to #108 and #109, but these seem fine.

Next meeting is scheduled for Dec 6, 1:15-3:15 in Chancellor's Conference Room

------------------------------------------------------------
CURRICULUM REVIEW COMMITTEE
Summary as of Dec 3, 2002

#1-40, 55-140,158-166

In addition the committee reviewed graduate proposals #8,15,19-24, and forwarded them to the GAAC.

Still pending (but expected to be approved are):
#41-54, #141-157, #168-174

Proposal #167 is being held pending approval from the Core Review committee.  (The proposer does not want this course unless it is approved for the core.)

Submitted by Gary Holton, chair

ATTACHMENT 112/16
UAF Faculty Senate #112
December 9, 2002
SUBMITTED BY DEVELOPMENTAL STUDIES

Minutes of the Developmental Studies Committee
October 31, 2002

The Developmental Studies Committee divided into three subgroups (Math, English, Study Skills) which subsequently met to discuss Recommendation 8 of the Developmental Studies Assessment report.  This recommendation addresses the articulation between DEVE/M and subsequent academic classes.

Recommendations from the Math Subgroup:

1) Mandatory placement for all Developmental Math courses (in conjunction with mandatory testing and advising)
2) Extended contact time (four hours of lecture per week?)
3) Provide a common course outline to all DEVM instructors
4) A common final exam should be prepared before the beginning of the semester (this will enable all DEVM instructors to know what topics should be covered)
5) Present statistics on the relationship between grade in the current course and success in the subsequent course to students, both at the beginning of the course and at the start of preregistration (we need new statistics for the past two (?) years)
6) Require a grade of C or higher in order to progress to the next course.  This requirement should be printed in the UAF catalog and semester class schedules (for both Fairbanks and the rural campuses).
For example: "Earned a grade of C or higher in previous class or appropriate placement test score."
7) Place a block supporting this requirement in the Banner system
8) Strengthen DEVM courses so that students are more prepared for their subsequent classes (???)
9) The DEVM courses should contain the same material and use the same books in Fairbanks, cross-regionally and by correspondence (?).

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

Meeting of the Developmental Studies Committee
Subgroup on Question #8-English

Attending: Rich Carr, Cindy Hardy, Ron Illingworth

We addressed the following questions relating to Recommendation #8
("Ensure consistency between exit criteria for lower level developmental courses and entry criteria for higher level developmental level courses.")

1. What are the exit and entry criteria for these courses?

Students enter DEVE courses through COMPASS or ASSET placement, through advising, or through self-placement.  The COMPASS/ASSET scores are established, as are recommendations for placement based on ACT or SAT scores.

Currently we know that the progression from DEVE to 100-level English classes (including CIOS 160) works for students on the Fairbanks campus.  This is, in part, influenced by a range of resources available to them (DEVE 068m Writing Center, SSS, etc).

We need to find out if students are as successful progressing from one level to another on the rural campuses.

In addition, we need to review and rewrite (if necessary) the objectives for each course to be sure the expectations for exit and entry overlap the way we assume they do.

2. How do DEVE classes and 100-level classes articulate.

There are currently many pathways a student may follow, depending on their academic goals.  For those going on to a four-year degree, the progression from the lowest level of developmental English is 060-070-111, with the possible addition of 068 labs as a support class at any point along that progression.  For those going into the AAS, or on some of the rural campuses, the progression may include DEVS 104 and 105 between the 070 and 111 levels.  For those in certificate programs this may, instead, include CIOS 160 and CIOS 260, but not 111, since those students are not being prepared to do academic-level work.

We need to find out the following:
	--What is the actual progression students take on the rural campuses?
	--Is there a different in the success rates of students in these progressions between rural and urban campuses?
	--What is the difference in success between students taking any DEVE or English class with the addition of a 068 and those taking these classes without the support of 068?

3. Do the progressions we offer meet the needs of students or do we need interim classes?

The answer to this question turns on the difference between a remedial program-one that addresses writing skills-and a truly developmental program-one that acknowledges and addresses a range of other factors that impact student learning and success.  These might include learning styles or learning disabilities, adaptation to the culture of the academic classroom, and life issues.

We need to find out what affects our students' ability to succeed and how we can change the student in the academic setting.

4. Is the highest level of DEVE sufficient for students going on to the
100 level?

In Fairbanks, this is working for students, with the support of the 068 labs, the Writing Center, SSS, and the Student Assistance Center.

For the rural campuses, where students may take DEVS 104 between 070 and 111, we need to find out if 104 is sufficient for students going on to 111.

We also need to find out if there is a need for DEVS 104 for some students on the Fairbanks campus.  Currently these students may drop out or repeat 070 or 060.  We need to find out what happens to students who get C or lower in these courses.

5. Are there alternative approaches?

We discussed several alternative approaches:

Computer-based instruction.  This can be effective for self-paced learning if combined with a face-to-face instructor.

Scheduling open-entry/exit classes not bound to a semester schedule.  These could operate in a manner similar to correspondence classes, but should NOT be correspondence classes.

Two-semester sequences.  While the 060/070 sequence does allow a student to take a full year of DEVE, there may be a need for some students to complete the 070-level course at a slower pace, similar to the DEVM 062/062 sequence.  Answers to the questions posed in #4 may help us determine the need for this.

6.  What more do we need to know to proceed?

--What are the written objectives of DEVE/DEVS/CIOS classes discussed here?

--What are the success rates of students taking core classes while taking DEVE classes?

--Can we reduce reliance on adjunct faculty be creating more full-time or permanent positions?

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

Minutes of Developmental Studies Committee:  Subcommittee A
        Recommendations 2,3,4,7

Attending: John Creed, Cindy Hardy, Ron Illingworth, Joe Mason, Jane Weber.

We met and discussed Recommendation 2, making the following changes to parts a-d:

a. A Developmental department should be established under CRA, headed by a department chair, elected from among the DEV faculty on all campuses.  This department would encompass the various aspects of Developmental Studies, including student orientation, student support, and courses (and course support.  This department should also serve as a link to related existing programs such as RSS, SSS, Math Lab and Writing Center, Advising Center, and to programs on each campus.

The chair would serve in a similar capacity to other department chairs at UAF, including release time to perform the duties of a chair and to travel to other campuses to meet with faculty face-to-face.

The department would also be fully staffed with admin assistants, computer support and other staff as determined by the faculty and chair.

b. An operational budget should be allocated to the Developmental education Department to fund faculty, support staff, materials, space, etc.

c. All developmental courses and services (such as learning Resource Centers for each campus) should be coordinated under the developmental education department.

d. A lead developmental education instructor should be designated as a point of contact for each CRA campus (and for Distance Delivered courses) and, where appropriate, be given release time to coordinate local developmental education efforts and to serve as the liaison to main campus developmental education.

Subcommittee A will meet again on Tuesday, November 26 2:00-3:30 and Tuesday December 3 2:00-3:30.   At our next meeting we will discuss recommendations 3 and 4.

ATTACHMENT 112/17
UAF Faculty Senate #112
December 9, 2002
SUBMITTED BY FACULTY APPEALS & OVERSIGHT

11/20/02 Faculty Appeals and Oversight Committee minutes:

The meeting began at 2:15

Present:  Gang Chen, Carol Gold, Brian Himelbloom, Glenn Juday, Paul Layer (chair), Julie Riley, Peter Stortz

The chair gave a brief update on the Administrator review of the Provost.  A committee has been formed with Eduard Zilberkant as chair.  FAOC committee members on the committee are Carol Gold and Paul Layer.  The first committee meeting will be on December 3.  

We discussed a draft motion presented by Peter Stortz and Julie Riley regarding group "B" administrators.  It is the committee’s feeling that, although the review of Group "A" administrators is moving forward, there has been little in the way of review of other Directors and Program Chairs.  Neither the Provost nor the Executive Dean of CRA has a review process in place that allows for faculty or other constituency input.  The proposed motion will outline a review process patterned after the review of Group "A" administrators.  Julie and Peter are reworking the motion for presentation at the Admin. Meeting and to the Senate.

We briefly discussed revisiting the issue of censure/no confidence votes of administrators.  The FAOC began to look at revisions to the current policy last year, but did not make any recommendations.  It was decided that the FAOC chair would bring this up at that Admin meeting to see if there is interest in the FAOC pursuing this topic.

No date was set for the next meeting, but it will occur sometime during the first week of classes in January.

The meeting adjourned at 3:15.

ATTACHMENT 112/18
UAF Faculty Senate #112
December 9, 2002
SUBMITTED BY FACULTY DEVELOPMENT, ASSESSMENT & IMPROVEMENT

Minutes of Faculty Development, Assessment, and Improvement Committee Meeting
Tuesday, 12 November 2002 / 9am
Office of Faculty Development, 222 Bunnell

Committee Members Present: Brian Barnes, Gerald Berman, Abel Bult-Ito (Chair), George Charles, Paul McCarthy, Joy Morrison, Roger Norris-Tull, Channon Price, and Shunpu Zhang

Committee Members Absent: Linda Curda, Lee Haugen, E. Thomas Robinson, and Ann Wilson

Guests present: Joan Braddock, Godwin Chukwu, and Jordan Titus

1.	Joan Braddock, Associate Director of IAB, and Godwin Chukwu, Faculty Senate President, were invited to contribute their views on the Faculty Mentoring Program.  Instead of providing a detailed transcript of this 40-min discussion, I will try to summarize the key issues brought up.  
	Some of the major problems identified with the Faculty Mentoring Program include:
	a.	Interpersonal problems between mentors and mentees.
	b.	Some mentors may impose their personality/ideas onto the mentee inappropriately
	c.	Some mentees do not choose their mentor(s).
	d.	Some mentor’s advice is too general or not enough guidance is given.
	e.	The mentor can be a role model and provide useful information and guidance, but sometimes mentees expect too much: for example it is unreasonable to assume that the mentor can tell the mentee what he/she needs to do to get tenure and promotion.  Responsibility for meeting tenure and promotion criteria lies with the mentee!
	f.	Some mentors do not make themselves available enough and do not show enough interest.

Some of the questions that need to be answered are:
	a.	What are the key roles of the mentor?
	b.	When does the mentor cross the line with respect to acceptable and unacceptable mentoring practices?
	c.	How are interpersonal problems going to be addressed?
	d.	What constitutes good mentor/mentee training?
	e.	What can or should the role of department chairs be with respect to mentoring?

Some potential solutions might include:
	a.	Mentees should choose their own mentor(s). Inform Provost’s Council that pre-assignment of mentors is not a good idea.
	b.	Both parties should have a good understanding of basic issues related to successful approaches to mentoring.
	c.	Mentors and mentees have to have a good understanding of their responsibilities.  It has to be clear that mentoring is a two-way street and that mentors give advice but cannot force their ideas or actions upon their mentees.
	d.	Receive information about correct format for a 4th year and tenure/promotion file, e.g., sample file.

George Charles, Paul McCarthy, Joy Morrison, and Roger Norris-Tull volunteered to form a Sub-Committee on the Faculty Mentoring Program to start developing guidelines/recommendations for a successful mentoring program.  This sub-committee will present their first report during the 3 December 2002 FDAIC meeting.

2.	Jordan Titus, Chair of the Department of Sociology, was invited to address the IAS student evaluation practices at UAF.  Jordan asked when the committee last reviewed IAS student evaluation practices at UAF.  She likes to propose that this committee investigates the effectiveness of the current teaching assessment tool and whether better other tools may be available.  Jordan and others identified some potentially serious problems with how IAS scores are used at UAF with respect to evaluation of teaching performance:

	a.	IAS student evaluations may be misused because those who use them, i.e., faculty and administrators, may be unaware of their limitations.  These evaluations have documented biases, it is not always clear to what extent these tools measure teaching effectiveness, and the number of students responding influence the reliability of the evaluation tool.
	b.	According to Jordan’s own research and through other information, teaching evaluations do not appear to have any effect on the improvement of teaching effectiveness.
	c.	IAS (like) teaching evaluations are widely used and 86% of institutions use these as their sole measure of teaching effectiveness, while IAS clearly states that they cannot be used in isolation.
	d.	Students may interpret items on the IAS forms very differently from how faculty and administrators interpret them.
	e.	Written evaluations (yellow sheets) are not available to faculty and administrators involved in performance reviews, although these evaluations may have much larger value than the numerical summaries.
	f.	Jordan’s perception is that the IAS scores can be used to identify very poor or very good teaching, but is not very useful for everything in between.

Research in this area has focused on the question why IAS-like student evaluations are not effective in improving teaching effectiveness.  This cannot be explained by arguments that faculty do not care, because they do care.  However, faculty appear not to make major changes, as a response to the teaching evaluations and, therefore, the content of the teaching evaluations is really not translated into teaching effectiveness.

We will continue discussions during our next meeting on 3 December 2002 and probably will form a sub-committee to research this issue and produce a set of recommendations.

3.	Joy Morrison provided some additional items of interest.
	a.	Joy is organizing brown bag meetings in the Office of Faculty Development (222 Bunnell) for departments chairs to discuss faculty development issues.
	b.	There will be an Academic Chairperson Conference 5-7 February 2003 in Orlando, Florida.  Two chairs have indicated they will attend this meeting and Joy is looking for additional chairs who might be interested
	c.	FDAIC Chair Abel Bult-Ito received the faculty Development at UAF FY01/02 Report to the Provost and this report will be briefly discussed at our next meeting.
	d.	The New Faculty Mentor Program Handbook from the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, will be distributed to committee members and mentors and mentees.  This handbook contains a lot of very useful information.

4.	The next meeting of the committee is scheduled for 9:00 am on Tuesday 3 December 2002.  The committee will meet again in the Office of Faculty Development conference room, 222 Bunnell.  The tentative agenda for this meeting is:
	a.	Continued discussion of IAS teaching evaluations and formation of sub-committee.  Jordan Titus will be invited again to participate in the discussions (15 min).
	b.	Norm Swazo will be invited to inform the committee about the Fund for Improving Post Secondary Education grant (10 min).
	c.	Report by the Sub-Committee on the Faculty Mentoring Program (15 min).
	d.	Faculty Development at UAF Annual Report (5 min).
	e.	Report by the Ad Hoc Committee on Unit Criteria (5 min).
	f.	Other business (10 min).

5.	The meeting was adjourned at 10:15am.

ATTACHMENT 112/19
UAF Faculty Senate #112
December 9, 2002
SUBMITTED BY AD HOC COMMITTEE ON UNIT CRITERIA

MINUTES

Ad Hoc Unit Review Committee, Nov 11, 2002

Members Present:

Abel Bult-Ito (FDAIC)
Gary Holton  (Curricular Affairs), chair
Dan Odess (Faculty Affairs)
Julie Riley (Faculty Appeals)

Guests:  Colin Reed (SOM), Jim Collins (Dean, SOM)

Guest speakers inquired as to the acceptability of unit criteria which are extremely specific, for example, specifying numbers of peer-reviewed articles and names of journals.  The committee agreed that this is appropriate and indeed welcomes such specific criteria.

Guest speakers presented objections to policy revisions as proposed in the draft motion to revise section III.E.  In particular, the most objectionable language is that which would require criteria to be approved by a majority of faculty in each department to which the criteria would apply.  This would permit a small department within a larger, coherent peer unit (such as SOM) to effectively block unit criteria, even in the absence of evidence that such department should be held to different standards.  The committee agrees that such an outcome was not the intent of the proposed policy revisions.  Departments or groups of faculty who object to imposition of unit criteria "from above" should be able to provide a cogent argument for why they should be treated differently.  For example, a department might argue that it has a significantly different mission than the unit (in which case the unit is probably not well constituted) or the department might argue that other universities also treat such departments differently for the purposes of peer review.

Guest speakers also objected to the proposed "grandfather" clause which would allow faculty to use old criteria when new criteria are approved during a faculty review period.  The committee will seek further input on this issue.

The issue of what defines a unit was raised again.  This seems to be a crucial issue in the whole unit criteria discussion.  There is now some consensus that unit criteria should only be developed for peer-review units, as defined in blue book section IV.B.5.a.  However, this interpretation would invalidate pending proposals from Journalism (smaller than a "unit") and CSEM (larger than a "unit").  The committee will seek further input from the Provost and deans on this issue.

Next meeting scheduled for Dec 4.