Faculty Senate Meeting
November 9, 1999
Columbia Roomer, Werner University Center
1.0 Call to Order
2.0 Call of the Roll:
Meredith Brodsky, Jim Chadney, Ming-Chi Own,
Andrey Clarke, Tina Fuchs, Leo Rasca-Hidalgo, Darryl Thomas, Linda
Stonecipher, Stephanie Tunison, and Marion Schrock were absent
3.0 Corrections to and approval of the minutes from the previous
senate meeting; Agenda adjustments. Minutes approved. No
4.0 Reports of the Presidents
4.1 Senate President:
Joel said there had not been an Executive
Meeting on Monday and thus there were no decisions about
Curriculum Proposals yet.
4.2 President of Western Oregon University.
invited questions. Provost Minahan answered questions about the
state of several newly proposed degrees. He emphasized that there is a
mandatory wait period of 45 days during which time private
universities may consider/respond to new offerings at other
universities. The MS has been approved in Social Policy. The
Anthropology degree awaits approval. The Forensic Chemistry
program has been approved but awaits an appropriate new hire.
4.3 Student Body President.
Obie Garza discussed the recent passage
of Resolution 99101, which regards diversity and tolerance on campus.
He described recent meetings with Governor Kitzhaber, which
regarded tuition freezes and childcare assistance for students. He
mentioned working with Provost Minahan on a proposed Chicana
minor for Western. Finally, he discussed his recent experiences at the
conference for the American Council of Education.
5.0 Reports of Interinstitutional Faculty Senators:
6.0 Reports of Faculty Senate Sub-Committees:
Only Brian Caster
(Curriculum Committee) spoke, reminding faculty that the last meeting
of the term would be next Tuesday (11/16).
7.0 Consideration of Old Business:
7.1 WOU and Diversity:
Members from most divisions shared input
derived from faculty at recent division meetings. These included
issuing several public statements: the placement of advertisements in
the university newspaper and the holding of public rallies, both aimed
at supporting diversity, tolerance, and respect on campus. These also
included recommendations about specific campus policy that should be
considered: (1) that a diversity/respect statement be included in any
potential Honor Code being drawn up; and (2) that a special
category of misconduct (and penalty) be defined for "hate crimes" in
the campus conduct code. Obie Garza emphasized the faculty could do
many things simply in the classroom.
7.2 IFS Member election:
None - See Joel's recent email about
specifics for this position.
7.3 Honor Code Committee Member election:
(Natural Sciences/Math), Bob Aldridge (Creative Arts/Music), Kim
Jensen (Social Sciences), Linda Keller (Special Education), Laura
Riolli-Saltzman (Business and Economics) were elected.
Health/Physical Education, Humanities, and Computer Science still
need to elect members to this Sub-Committee.
7.4 Enrollment Committee Member election:
None. Please gather
nominees for this sub-committee.
7.5 Faculty Senate Webpage:
Chehalis Strapp and Sarah Boomer
volunteered to work with Joel on this site (as described at the last
meeting). It was also recommended that an ordered discussion group
function be available on this site so that issues may be further debated
by senators on-line. Sarah Johnson (Instructional
Designer/Educational Media Center) will be consulted.
8.0 Consideration of New Business
8.1 Evaluation of the Writing Intensive Class Designation:
discussion of this topic ensued following Carol Harding's introduction
and overview of writing intensive coursework and the approval
process. Some major points:
- Joel recommended that the Academic Requirements Committee
perform a re-evaluation of the writing intensive requirements. This
motion was approved by the Senate.
- It is unclear whether there are enough designated writing intensive
classes in each major to allow students to complete writing
requirements; faculty are strongly encouraged to develop new
curriculum or seek approval for potential writing intensive coursework
they currently teach.
- A previously published handbook on writing intensive classes will be
re-published by the registrar and made available through the writing
- Comments about the lengthiness of the paperwork/process were made
by a faculty member who had recently submitted materials for approval.
- There was moderate discussion about the appropriateness of some
writing intensive requirements for certain disciplines (e.g. science and
- Requests were made to better list "writing intensive" courses in the
schedule and the catalog; one problem noted was that some general
courses had been approved writing intensive as taught by one faculty
but not by others (and this complicated records).
- The questions of student feedback, faculty evaluation/perceptions of
student writing in upper division courses, and post-graduate
evaluation of Western's program was undertaken, albeit with little
resolution. Relative to other Oregon Universities, it was noted, Western
requires the minimum number of freshman writing courses (because we
require upper division writing). Thus, the efficacy of supplementary
writing intensive-desginated upper division coursework must be
The meeting was adjourned.