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

A G E N D A
UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #139
Monday, November 6, 2006
1:00 p.m. - 3:10 p.m.
Wood Center Carol Brown Ballroom

1:00	I	Call to Order – Shirish Patil    				  5 Min.
		A.	Roll Call
		B.	Approval of Minutes to Meeting #137
		C.	Adoption of Agenda

1:05	II	Status of Chancellor's Office Actions 			  5 Min.
	A.	Motions Approved:
1.	Motion to amend Section 3, (Article V, Committees, Standing) of the Bylaws by deleting E.4., the Faculty Research Oversight Committee.
2.	Motion to add STAT 200 as a Mathematics Literacy component of the Core Curriculum.
3.	Motion to modify the "Guidelines for the Evaluation Process for Administrators (Group A) to add the Dean of Libraries and the Vice Chancellor for Research.
4.	Motion to suspend the Group B Administrators reviews for 2006-2007.
5.	Motion to modify the UAF document "Policies and Regulations for the Appointment and Evaluation of Faculty" Chapter IV, D, 1, b (3) to add "unsatisfactory" to the categories for ranking or evaluating faculty.
	B.	Motions Pending:  none

1:10 	III	Public Comments/Questions   				  5 Min.

1:15	IV	A.	President's Comments - Shirish Patil    		10 Min. 
		B.	President-elect's Report - Jon Genetti  		  5 Min.

1:30	V	A.	Remarks by Chancellor Steve Jones   		10 Min.
		B.	Remarks by Provost P. Reichardt  			10 Min.

1:50	VI	Guest Speaker 						20 Min.
		A.	Ro Bailey, Vice Chancellor for Administrative Services
 		B.	Curt Madison, Director, Center for Distance Education''

2:10  	BREAK  - Group Photo (Multi-level lounge)

2:25	VII	Governance Reports    					  5 Min. 
	A.	Staff Council - Jeff Stepp 
	B.	ASUAF -Sven Gilkey 

2:30	VIII	New Business  						5 Min.
A.	Motion to amend the Associate of Arts degree requirements, submitted by the Core Review and Curricular Affairs Committee (Attachment 139/1)

2:35	IX	Discussion Item						10 Min. 
	A.	Advising Pre-Majors - Dana Thomas

2:45	IX	Committee Reports     					15 Min.
	A.	Curricular Affairs - Marsha Sousa (Attachment 139/2 & 139/3)
	B.	Faculty Affairs - Sukumar Bandopadhyay
	C.	Unit Criteria - Debasmita Misra (Attachment 139/4)
	D.	Committee on the Status of Women - Jane Weber (Attachment 139/5 & 139/6))
	E.	Core Review - Michael Harris (Attachment 139/7)
	F.	Curriculum Review - Rainer Newberry
	G.	Developmental Studies - Cindy Hardy (Attachment 139/8))
	H.	Faculty Appeals & Oversight - Norm Swazo (Attachment 139/9)
	I.	Faculty Development, Assessment & Improvement - Larry Roberts 
	J.	Graduate Academic & Advisory Committee - Cathy Cahill (Attachment 139/10)

3:00	X	Members' Comments/Questions				10 Min.

3:10	XI	Adjournment

ATTACHMENT 139/1
UAF Faculty Senate #139
November 6, 2006

MOTION:
=======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend the Associate of Arts degree requirements (2006-2007 UAF catalog, page 83) to the following:

[[   ]] = 	Deletion
CAPS  = 	Addition 

General Associate Degree Requirements

You must have completed at least 60 semester hours, including transfer credits, to earn a UAF associate degree.

At least 15 credits applicable to any associate degree must be UAF resident credits.

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

THE CURRICULUM OF THE ASSOCIATE OF ARTS DEGREE CONSISTS OF ALL COURSES REQUIRED TO MEET THE UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS BACCALAUREATE CORE, WITH THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS: 
1. THE UPPER DIVISION WRITING AND ORAL INTENSIVE COURSES ARE NOT REQUIRED 
2. IN PLACE OF THE UPPER DIVISION ETHICS COURSE A HUMANITIES OR SOCIAL SCIENCE ELECTIVE MAY BE SUBSTITUTED

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

BACCALAUREATE CORE CREDITS..............38-44 credits

General Electives ......................16-22 credits

[[Communication (9 credits)
ENGL 111X--Introduction to Academic Writing (3)
Complete one of the following:
ENGL 211X--Academic Writing about Literature (3)
ENGL 212--Business, Grant and Report Writing* (3)
ENGL 213X--Academic Writing about the Social and Natural Sciences (3)
Complete one of the following:
COMM 131X--Fundamentals of Oral Communication: Group Context (3)
COMM 141X--Fundamentals of Oral Communication: Public Context (3)

Mathematics or natural science (10 credits) 
Complete one of the following:
MATH 107X--Functions for Calculus** (4)
MATH 161X--Algebra for Business and Economics (3)
MATH 103X--Concepts and Contemporary Applications of Mathematics (3)
MATH 200X, 201X, 202X, 262X, 272X or any math course having one of these as a prerequisite (4)
One natural science course, with lab, from the baccalaureate core (4)
Mathematics (computer science, mathematics or statistics course at the 100-level or above) or natural science elective (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)
Complete one of the following:
ART/MUS/THR 200X--Aesthetic Appreciation: Interrelationship of Art, Drama and Music (3)
HUM 201X--Unity in the Arts (3)
ANS 202X--Aesthetic Appreciation of Alaska Native Performance (3)
ENGL/FL 200X--World Literatures (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 Research (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 baccalaureate majors and minors.) (22–23)
Electives to total (60 credits) ]]

STUDENTS PLANNING TO GO ON TO THE BACCALAUREATE DEGREE ARE ADVISED TO SELECT COURSES MEETING REMAINING CORE REQUIREMENTS AND COURSES DESIGNATED WITHIN BACCALAUREATE MAJORS AND MINORS.

TOTAL CREDITS REQUIRED  ................60 CREDITS. 

 [[* ENGL 212 does not fulfill the second half of the written communication requirement for the baccalaureate degree.
** No credit may be earned for more than one of MATH 107X or 161X.]]

	EFFECTIVE:  	Fall 2007
				Upon Chancellor's Approval

RATIONALE:  	 The AA degree should directly articulate with the baccalaureate core degree requirements. Students should be able to move seamlessly from the AA degree to a four year degree. There should not be wasted credits or exceptions that will confuse the student’s ability to move to a four year degree. The current AA degree requirements are different from the baccalaureate core degree requirements. The catalog description and the degree checklist are also different from the current baccalaureate core requirements. The AA degree should articulate directly with the baccalaureate core. By linking the degree requirements for the Associate of Arts program directly to the baccalaureate core, the AA program requirements will always be consistent with the baccalaureate core requirements. 

ATTACHMENT 139/2
UAF Faculty Senate #139
November 6, 2006

Curricular Affairs
Minutes, 10-2-06 Meeting

Present: Jodie Anderson, Ataur Chowdhury, Rainer Newberry, Tony Rickard, Marsha Sousa, Tim Stickel, Melissa McGinty

Absent: Larry Roberts, Ilana Kingsley, Anna Berge, Linda Hapsmith

Discussion continued on the following agenda items:
1.	Implications on policy of the change to +/- grades
•	Where is the cut-off for honors graduation, semester honors?
•	Does “C or better” mean a 2.0 C or any flavor of C?
•	Are there implications with regard to financial aid?

2.	Should we delete the requirement for faculty signature for HS student enrollment?
•	Is the function of the signature to monitor age, maturity, or academic preparation?
•	If it is simply difficult for students to obtain the signature, would allowing the Dept. Chair to sign off solve the problem?

3.	Should baccalaureate students be required to declare a major when they have 75 or more credits?
•	The intent is to increase retention, graduation, tracking, and good advising
•	This is for Baccalaureate students only, and does not include Cert, AA, AAS or non-degree students
•	Why 75 credits? Should we lower to 45 or 30 credits?
•	Should developmental classes be included in the calculation of the 75 credits….they don’t count toward degree.
•	Can Banner query this appropriately?

4.	Catalog: removing course descriptions and faculty info from printed catalog
•	Need additional information

Actions:
75-credit requirement issues:  Marsha will check with Colleen about banner queries, with Dana about the 75 credit cut-off, and with RSS and Advising Centers about implications.
Catalog issues: Tony will contact Scott McCrae
+/- Grade issues: Ataur will summarize information for next meeting

Meeting time was changed to Monday from 3:30- 4:30 to accommodate members who have not been able to attend previously.  Next meeting is Oct. 16, 3:30 – 4:30.

ATTACHMENT 139/3
UAF Faculty Senate #139
November 6, 2006

Curricular Affairs
Minutes of 10-16-06

Meeting began at 3:35.

Present: Rainer Newberry, Ilana Kingsley, Tony Rickard, Anna Berge, Marsha Sousa, Ataur Chowdhury, Tim Stickel, Melissa McGinty
Absent, but tried to call in:  Carol Lewis, Jodi Anderson, Larry Roberts
Guest: Shirish Patil

1.	Changes to the AA degree

Motion was brought forward to change the requirements for the AA degree to make it better align with moving into the baccalaureate.  The changes involved primarily the science and math components.  New description will not list specific classes, but will instead require completion of baccalaureate core, without 300-level ethics and W and O intensives.  Students are encouraged to complete other baccalaureate foundation courses as part of the electives.  Discussion focused on the W and O requirements, whether developmental courses count toward the degree (they do if they are at the 100-level), and clarity of the presentation.

Motion passed, and will be forwarded to faculty senate.

2.	Signature requirement for high school students

Shirish originally brought this proposal forward, and he attended CA to present his rationale. Basically his view is that most of the HS students attending UAF are highly motivated and the signature requirement is an unnecessary hassle for them and their parents.  Most faculty wanted to preserve the right/responsibility to assess student academic preparation and maturity with regard to course content via the signature requirement.  All acknowledge that it is difficult to get those signatures, particularly in summer.  Some faculty felt comfortable delegating the signature authority to advising center personnel.  Others felt that this was too much to ask of a general advisor in the advising center, and that dept. chairs would be a better proxy for the signature.  Tim is willing to accept email from faculty as permission rather than a requirement for a face-to-face meeting and physical signature.  Motion was made to change the HS registration form to read “permission of instructor or dept. head” and to clarify on the form that email from faculty is adequate for permission.

Motion passed.  Tim will draft changes to enrollment form.

3.	+/- Grades

Rainer drafted changes to catalog language.  Discussion centered on benefits of various changes, ability of Banner to implement the changes, and need for individual to look through records.  The discussion about the individual issues, and the decisions follow.  A draft of the changes is attached.

Paragraph 1 on Rainer’s proposal: Placement on probation.
Rainer suggests adding language that 1st year students who have less than a 2.0 but no grade lower than C- NOT be placed on probation. RSS supports this view.  Since previously a C- would not be detected, this in effect helps retain the original intent of the 2.0.  However, Banner will not be able to capture less than 2.0 and nothing lower than C-.  Should we create policy that requires personal follow-up?
Result:  No change to language about remaining in good standing and being placed on probation.

Paragraph 2: Getting off of probation

Marsha proposed to phrase “…must earn at least a C- grade in all courses taken as a non-degree student, and have an overall GPA of 2.0 as a non-degree student.”  This  would not change the previous standard that didn’t include the C- option.  However, again, this would require that some individual look at the grades to make sure no grade is less than C-.

Result: Change to language above.

Paragraph 3:  Earning a C in all major and minor courses
	
Most discussion centered on whether a C- meets competency standards in the major and minor.  We were reminded that if we established a C- as the standard, an individual program could still implement a higher standard of a C or some other level, as Business does.  No one wanted to get rid of the overall GPA of 2.0, but there was not general agreement on the C vs. C-, however the majority voted to retain a 2.0 C and not allow a C-.

Result: Clarify that a student must earn a minimum of a 2.0 C in all major and minor courses.

Paragraph 4:  “good standing” 

Discussion about the same issues: C- vs C.  However, in addition, if we make any changes to this policy, all MAUs have to agree. Apparently all MAU financial offices agreed to have the same standards.  

Result: Rainer is going to talk more with Tamara.

Paragraph 5: Chancellor’s and Dean’s list

Should we change Chancellor’s list to a 3.9 with no grade less than A-?  Previously many A- students made Chancellor’s list, since A- was not recorded. If we go with a straight 3.9, it is possible that someone with mostly A, but a B thrown in, could still make Chancellor’s list.  If we require a check to look for nothing less than A-, it will have to be done by hand.  There aren’t very many students who fall into that category, however, someone will have to take responsibility.  Should that be Curricular Affairs?

Result: You will make Chancellor’s list with 3.9 and no grade less than A-.  We didn’t clarify whose responsibility it is to check the grades.  There is no change to Dean’s list requirements.

Paragraph 6: Honor graduation grades

Same discussion issues, but since graduation office has to hand check each honor grad anyway, a system is already in place.

Result: No change to cum laude and magna cum laude.  Summa cum laude would change to 3.8 GPA and no grade lower than A-.

4.	Proposal to require GENP students to declare major at 75 credits

Didn’t discuss this one.  Waiting for more information from Dana.

Meeting ended at 4:50.
Next meeting: Monday, October 30, 3:30- 4:30

ATTACHMENT 139/4
UAF Faculty Senate #139
November 6, 2006

Minutes for 23 October 2006 
Unit Criteria Committee

Present:  Julie Cascio (via teleconference); Lee Taylor; Gerri Brightwell; Debasmita Misra; Brenda Konar

1.	New member Dr. Gerri Brightwell was welcomed to the committee.
2.	All members present approved the agenda.
3.	All members present approved the minutes of September 6, 2006.
4.	Old business:
Debu Misra announced that the petition on the motion to modify the University of Alaska Fairbanks' document, “Faculty Appointment and Evaluation Policies” Chapter IV, D, 1,b,(3), has been approved by the faculty senate on September 18, 2006.
5.	Two Unit Criteria (UC) were reviewed and discussed by the committee: UC of the Computer Science Unit and UC of the Foreign Languages and Literatures Unit. The committee had concerns on the criteria developed by both the units. Memo will be sent to both the units with the specific concerns listed.
6.	Meeting was adjourned at 10:20 am.

prepared by Debu Misra on October 24, 2006

ATTACHMENT 139/5
UAF Faculty Senate #139
November 6, 2006

Faculty Senate Committee on the Status of Women
September 28, 2006

Minutes by Sine Anahita

Present:	David Koester, Alex Fitts, Jane Weber, Kayt Sunwood (ex-officio), Renate Wackerbauer, Cécile Lardon, Brenda Norris, Wendy Zhou, Sine Anahita

•	meeting times:
o	Tuesday 1-2 best for most of us, although Alex is sandwiched between classes.
o	next meetings scheduled: October 24, 1:00-2:00, location TBA.
o	November 21, 1:00-2:00, location TBA
•	David mentioned that Maribeth Murray, chair of Anthropology, is writing NSF grant related to women in science & engineering; she would be interested in attending the next Fac Sen CSW meeting to get ideas and feedback; we put her on the agenda for Nov 21 meeting; David will issue the invitation
•	about luncheon:
o	fabulous success, lots of networking, informal feedback all positive, ice cream social wonderful, Joan Braddock’s talk was inspiring, Jake already committed to fund next year’s event
o	next year: emphasize the purpose of the Fac Sen CSW is to focus on women faculty; to that end, raise the visibility of the Faculty Senate part of the CSW name, informal discussion with particular people on the issue of staff being invited
o	2007 date: September 25, 12:30-2:30, location TBA
o	Sheri will give us paper to write thank you notes
•	women staff:
o	one of our objectives is to expand connections to women staff members at UAF
o	suggestion that we invite a member of Staff Council to be a liaison to the Fac Sen CSW;
o	Kayt may be appointed to Staff Council for an empty seat for which there is no alternate; she could be our liaison to Staff Council so that the rest of the committee can focus on women faculty
•	Chancellor’s Campus Diversity Action Committee:
o	Jane is the Fac Sen CSW rep now, will share with Sine and others who are interested;
o	Cindy may be interested in doing it again if the time works for her
•	Campus Women Lead
o	Kayt talked about the Campus Women Lead initiative suggested by the Provost, funded by the Chancellor, and organized by her as manager of the Women’s Center.
o	They want to know issues facing women on campus before their visit. Jane asked if we could meet with them. Sine will audioconference with Kayt at their initial meeting to talk about the Faculty Work Life study findings
o	David noted they funded the global studies initiative, and that they are a good organization
•	Fac Sen CSW Tenure & Promotion Workshop 2007:
o	April 27, 1:00-4:00; try to get 109 Butro again
o	Sine will coordinate with Provost’s Office to make sure this works for their calendar
o	Jane will find out about food funding 
•	Fac Sen CSW website: 
o	Uma Bhatt suggested an online bibliography of articles about women faculty issues that have been circulating among the committee
o	Sine will do website with links to Final Report, bibliography, calendar of meetings & events, mentoring info, etc.
•	brainstorming re: agenda for the year:
o	Alex: anyone know status of the petition circulating at the Fac Sen CSW luncheon? No.
o	mentors: Renate: mentors need to be responsible; need more informal ways to meet mentors and to be mentored; Cécile mentioned Susan Todd and herself are starting women’s research group; Brenda mentioned faculty women’s caucus; Sine mentioned Carol Gold’s idea of a mentoring workshop for mentors; Jane mentioned informal Pub nights to invite mentors/mentees—would cost nothing, help facilitate networking; Wendy suggested clubs, like ping pong clubs; Sine emphasized the need for solutions to be institutional and structural, and not focusing on individuals; Brenda and David suggested faculty club; Sine mentioned concerns with elitism and gender segregation
•	we’ll invite Joy Morrison of the Center for Faculty Development to our next meeting:
o	Sine will give brief analysis of the findings of the study
o	we will talk to her about our view of the needs of women faculty
o	give Joy support for initiatives for women faculty
•	Faculty Work Life Study:
o	we discussed creating a comprehensive plan that includes strategic communication, media blitz, expanded analysis, supplemental reports on salary, etc.
o	next time: Sine will do 5 minute talk about the findings
o	David—can we frame in terms of outcomes budgeting

ATTACHMENT 139/6
UAF Faculty Senate #139
November 6, 2006

Faculty Senate Committee on the Status of Women
October 24, 2006

minutes by Sine Anahita

present:	David Koester, Alex Fitts, Jane Weber, Kayt Sunwood (ex-officio), Renate Wackerbauer, Brenda Norris, Sine Anahita, Robinson Duffy (reporter from the Fairbanks News-Miner)
missing:	Cécile Lardon, Wendy Zhou (who had a faculty meeting)

•	new date set for Women Faculty Luncheon, since our original date conflicted with Convocation: September 18, 2007
•	agenda for next meeting: Joy Morrison and Maribeth Morgan have been invited
o	Joy Morrison: we wish to chat with her about women faculty issues, mentoring, how Faculty Development and our committee might work together, what issues she can identify
o	Maribeth Morgan: she is writing a grant to benefit women scientists
•	Kayt is our staff liaison to Staff Council; she hopes to be appointed/elected to Staff Council, but if not, she will continue to represent the Fac Sen CSW on an ad hoc basis to Staff Council
•	Sine discussed highlights from the work life study, along with the six goals the Faculty Senate CSW identified last year; handout is attached
•	the committee discussed the findings and brainstormed what to do next
o	strong consensus that increasing public access to the university’s data on salary, tenure & promotion, etc. is vital; David and Alex noted that state law requires public access to these data; David subsequently looked up the state law and sent it to the committee
o	transparency of processes, e.g. negotiation, hiring, recruitment, is important
o	Kayt will find out when Campus Women Lead propose to come to UAF; she talked with the key organizer, who is meeting with other staff to propose a tailor-made curriculum for UAF; Chancellor earlier committed to paying for CWL workshop(s); how can we utilize the opportunity of CWL workshop(s) to further our objectives?
o	Brenda and Renate are willing to help crunch existing and new data
o	David wants to further discuss the entire notion of “diversity”, maintaining that diversity is an important and valuable goal alongside equity; equitable diversity, equity and diversity were both suggested as phrases we should incorporate
o	eight action items emerged from our discussion:
1.	take the six goals to the Faculty Senate in the form of motions and resolutions
2.	discuss the problem of gender (in)equity with President Mark Hamilton
3.	ensure Faculty Alliance is aware of the issues; Cindy noted that Shirish Patil is chair of Faculty Senate and Faculty Alliance
4.	through Kayt, work with Staff Council so they are aware of the issues facing women faculty, to offer the Fac Sen CSW’s support on a similar study or other initiatives they might take, and to solidify our networking relationships among faculty and staff
5.	Jane and Sine will co-write an editorial for the Fairbanks News-Miner and circulate its final draft to the committee
6.	make gender equity issues bargaining points in the upcoming union contract negotiations; David notes that “equity” is already part of the language, but that we should make “gender equity” part of it
7.	conduct further analysis of the data; Renate and Brenda will be work on analysis; key points to examine: 1) term hires v. non-term hires by gender; salary compression by gender
8.	ask for more data from Statewide; Salary for 2006 for sure—what else?
•	holiday potluck: Jane and Sine suggested holiday potluck as a team-building and community building event; two or three members had already left, but the consensus among those who remained was that having a potluck was a good idea. Sine and Kayt volunteered their home for the event. We will email suggested dates.

ATTACHMENT 139/7
UAF Faculty Senate #139
November 6, 2006

Core Review Committee 
Minutes for the Meeting of Monday Oct 23 2006

present: Carrie Baker, Latrice Bowman, Jin Brown, Karen Callahan, Christine Coffman, Steve Cysewski, (members), Susan Henrichs, Sue McHenry (guests)

Report for the Senate Minutes.  The committee met on Oct 23 with six members present. Also present were Sue McHenry and Susan Henrichs.  The committee reviewed three petitions (one was approved, two are waiting for more information), and had a brief discussion about updating/revising the petition form.  Also discussed was the idea to use core assessment as a guideline to create an assessment for the AA program.  The next committee meeting is on Monday Nov 13.

ATTACHMENT 139/8
UAF Faculty Senate #139
November 6, 2006

Minutes of the Faculty Senate
Developmental Studies Committee
Oct 3, 2006

Attendees: Jane Allen, Latrice Bowman, Joe Dupras, Dana Greci, Linda Hapsmith, Cindy Hardy, Marji Illingworth, Ron Illingworth, Joe Mason, Brian Rasley. Guests: Jerah Chadwick, Jane Weber (Department of Developmental Education).  Guests from the Chancellor’s Developmental Education Implementation Task Force: Eric Heyne, Paul Layer, Greg Owens, Dana Thomas. 

Proposals for the Statewide Developmental initiative: Jane Weber has submitted two from Developmental Math, Ron Illingworth has submitted one, and Marjorie Illingworth has submitted two.  Dana Thomas reported that Larry Duffy has submitted a proposal from Chemistry and that there are proposals from UAA and UAS.

The committee asked if Dana Thomas knew if these proposals were part of a coordinated strategy.  He said that they were part of a broad-based strategy to address issues of developmental education.

Mandatory placement update: We are charged with developing the details of the mandatory placement motion passed by the Senate last spring so that full implementation can phase in by Fall 2008.  Math is far along.  DEVE faculty are communicating with English on placement issues.

Dana Thomas reported that a mandatory placement working group has begun meeting as one of the Chancellor’s task forces on Student Success. They have spoken with the Registrar and Banner folks to find out if the prerequisites can be blocked in Banner.   This still cannot be done without affecting UAA and UAS.   The task force suggests two alternatives: to create a Banner add-on just for UAF or to have faculty do a manual check of their students through UAonline.   Dana noted that the motion as it stands doesn’t allow for linked courses.  Joe Mason and Jerah Chadwick noted that they have both received requests from school districts in their regions for incoming expectations for English 111 so that they can better prepare their students.

Curriculum review: no courses to review at this point.

Blackboard site: Cindy Hardy reminded the committee that the committee Blackboard site is available and stocked with documents and files.

Visit by members of the Developmental Education Implementation Task Force:  Dana Thomas reported that the task force was formed to recommend changes in Developmental Education to Bernice Joseph, CRCD Executive Dean.  He sees the task force as giving an outside perspective on developmental education. We clarified for the task force the difference and relationship between the Developmental Education Department and the Faculty Senate Developmental Studies Committee. The committee does developmental course curriculum review for the Faculty Senate and serves as a clearinghouse and coordinator between the Department of Developmental Education and other university entities on developmental issues. 

Dana asked what has happened so far with the recommendations of the DEVS committee in the forming of the Department of Developmental Education.  We reported that the department has formed and has been running for three years, but that it has been a gradual transition from a loosely connected group of faculty—many adjunct or term—to a fully-functioning department.  Dana asked what recommendations we would make at this point—what are our priorities for Developmental Education.  We listed the following:

1. More developmental instructors or limited class size, 
2. A placement and assessment process w/ standards,
3. Linkage of developmental programs across MAU’s, 
4. The ability to follow students through advising and/or instructor contact through the first “academic” semester,
5. Academic intervention with probation students, 
6. Interaction between academic departments and developmental faculty, offering assistance for their students,
7. Establishing a learning assistance center on Fairbanks campus, 
8. Better implementation of standards,
9. Better tracking/statistics/outcomes assessment.

The Committee and the task force continued discussion on the following:

What are best practices in Developmental Education?  Why not try some test classes using best practices then evaluate what works best for UAF.  Eric Heyne pointed out that if we adopt “cheap” solutions, we pay for them later when they don’t work.  Marji Illingworth pointed out that a number of good programs have functioned for long periods of time on a trial bases, then were first cut when budget cuts came along.  These include TVC’s Student Learning Assistance program, Project College and Career, Academic Probation Intervention, and the Cross-Cultural Communication program. 

Data on developmental students: Jane Weber pointed out that developmental students are not all seeking a Bachelor’s degree so don’t show on completion data that is orientated towards students completing a four-year degree.  Further, there are many courses incorporated into vocational programs that don’t have a DEV designator, but are at the developmental level.  Consequently, data on developmental success rates may be skewed.  Dana Thomas suggested that we compare the data for UAF with that of UAA and UAS.  This may be possible using the STARS data.

Outcomes assessment: Eric Heyne suggested that the department should write its own outcomes assessment plan; that those outside the department should become involved only in terms of entry standards into core classes.

Developmental Class levels: Dana Thomas asked where UAF should start in Developmental Courses. What is the starting level (as opposed to ABE)?  A few campuses offer ABE (Bethel, for example); others refer students to local non-profits such as ALPA or to regional non-profit corporations.  Linda Hapsmith reported that it is difficult to get students to go to off –campus ABE programs when they test at that level.  Jane Allen reported that the Bethel ABE program, housed on campus, is working quite well.

Developmental “tracks”: Paul Layer suggested the possibility of developing multiple “tracks” for students with different needs, ie: ESL, learning disabilities, etc.  Dana Thomas asked if we have data on the scale of these needs.

The next meeting will be Tuesday, October 31, 1-2:30pm.

ATTACHMENT 139/9
UAF Faculty Senate #139
November 6, 2006

Faculty Appeals & Oversight Committee
Submitted by Norm Swazo, Chair

Members of the FAOC held a meeting on Wednesday, October 11, at 3:30PM and engaged several items of business:

1.	CRCD Executive Dean Bernice Joseph reported on completion of her evaluation of campus director Saito Lincoln.  Dean Joseph had completed her evaluation prior to receiving the various materials made available from the governance office through the FAOC sub-committee review process.  Because of a question concerning assurance of faculty input into the evaluation process, Dean Joseph agreed with a committee recommendation that she provide an addendum to her letter of evaluation.

2.	Provost Paul Reichardt met with the committee to initiate discussion on the task of developing an appropriate process for evaluation of “B” list administrators.  He shared with the committee samples of evaluation materials used at another institution and suggested that whatever process UAF formulates and implements should have some uniformity.  He reported that the members of the Provost’s Council did not have time during the most recent meeting to engage the question.

3.	Norm Swazo suggested that one problem we have is to identify the group who fall into the “B” list and suggested we begin to sort out this question by obtaining an official list of those designated as “executive.”  The provost will provide that information to the committee.  Provost Reichardt also agreed to have the deans’ council begin some preliminary discussion about the process for “B” list evaluation.  Swazo also suggested the deans’ council consider forming a joint sub-committee with FAOC to draft a mutually agreeable policy.  Provost Reichardt agreed to inform the deans’ council of this idea as well.

4.	No other business at hand, the committee adjourned.  The next meeting of the committee is scheduled for November 15, 3:30PM.

ATTACHMENT 139/10
UAF Faculty Senate #139
November 6, 2006

Graduate Academic & Advisory Committee

Minutes for October 26, 2006.

Present:  Derek Burleson, Cathy Cahill, Patty Gray, Abhijit Dandekar, Katrin Iken, David Maxwell, Laura Milner, Susan Henrichs, Oceana Francis-Chythlook, Laura Bender and Shirish Patil

During the GAAC meeting:

1)	Course/program change requests were distributed to the GAAC members for review.

2)	The courses defined as ‘Moldy’ by the School of Education (ED 609, 622, 623, 633, 656 and 663) were approved for deletion by GAAC.

3)	GAAC discussed the implications of the new +/- grading system.  We agreed unanimously that the requirement that a graduate student maintain a 3.0 grade point average to stay in good standing should be retained.  We also agreed that a B- is sufficient to pass a course in the student’s program.  However, we did agree that different programs could set tougher standards.  Also, if a student has a GPA below 3.0 for a semester, the student’s program can write a memo stating that the student is doing fine and should stay in good standing.

We are checking how the +/- grading will impact international students’ standing.

GAAC feels that the catalog wording should be the letter for all flavors of that specific letter grade (so B in the catalog would mean B+, B, and B-) and a number for a specific grade criteria (so 3.0 for the overall GPA required to stay in good standing instead of B).

4)  GAAC also discussed what should be done about stacking criteria.  The result of this discussion was that GAAC will evaluate the differences on a case-by-case basis because no single set of criteria would be applicable to all cases.  We currently require that the syllabi submitted with new course or stacking request paperwork show a ‘substantive difference’ in the requirements for the undergraduate and graduate students in the class so we are already evaluating the differences in the course expectations for graduate and undergraduate students.

We also want to remind college curricular committees and Summer Sessions to be careful about courses that have linked undergraduate and graduate portions.

5)	GAAC recommends that Summer Sessions should try to make courses that are offered year-to-year as special topics courses formal courses.  Graduate students are limited in the number of special topics credits they can use for the degree so assigning non-special topics course numbers to the students will assist them in graduating.

The next GAAC meeting will be November 9th at 3:30 PM.