Minutes 25 April 2000

| No Comments

 Tuesday, April 25, 

3:30 p.m.
Columbia Room 

1.0 Call to Order 


2.0 Call of the Roll: 

There was one substitution: Bryan Dutton for Irja
Galvan.
The following senators were absent: Dean Bethea, Brian Bonnlander,
Meredith
Brodsky, Tina Fuchs, Stephanie Tunison, and Wangeshi Gatimu. 


3.0. Corrections to and approval of the minutes from the previous
senate meeting/Agenda Adjustments. Minutes approved. There
were no agenda adjustments. 


4.0. Reports of the Presidents 


4.1 Senate President 




4.11 Joel reminded all senators that new senator positions must be
decided by the next meeting. New senator information can be
provided to Joel (alexanj@wou.edu) or Sarah (boomers@wou.edu).
New senators are required to come with old senators to the May 9
meeting. 


4.12 Executive Committee elections will take place
May 23. The nominating committee for this committee will be
decided upon after all new senate positions have been determined.
While the role of the vice president has not changed for the next
academic year, it has been discussed that we may want to
incorporate faculty senate webpage maintenance into his/her
duties and take that up formally next year. 


4.13 Joel reminded senators of the recent email detailing all
Executive Committee-approved course approvals. 


4.14 Joel requested input/suggestions for an outside non-research,
non-WOU-affiliated member to serve on the IRB committee, the
federal grant-mandated committee on campus that oversees
research involving human subjects. 


4.15 Joel reminded senators that course change forms REQUIRE
Ed. Media and library signatures so that potential course impact on
these resources may be communicated. 


4.16 The W and D designated course issue remains in limbo until
the ARC can present more exact findings. Joel hoped that their
long-awaited report would take place at the next meeting. 




4.2 President of Western Oregon University

President Youngblood said the budget report will be on next month's
agenda.
There was no further report.

President Youngblood and Provost Minahan were asked about
whether the catalog would be 1, 2, or 4 year and much discussion
ensued. Provost Minahan noted the large cost (approx. 40K) of
publishing new catalogs, although noted that many are handed out
as recruiting tools (and the true effectiveness of this is not known).
While he commended the obvious curriculum development going
on, he hoped that faculty would recognize the need for a long-term
catalog and understand that not every change needed to go into
catalogs (sub-catalog information provided within departments, for
example, could suffice over some periods of time). Joel asked
whether a "mini-catalog" that was less expensive to produce could
be written to solve the problem of using the expensive catalog as a
recruiting tool. The Provost said this was under consideration. 


4.3 Student Body President

Obie Garza was not present. 


5.0 Consideration of Old Business 


5.1 The new "on-line routing form" was discussed, with some differences
in
opinion. Some senators believed that there should be an
intermediate form that addressed courses that were both "in-load"
and "self-sustained." Some senators believed that additional
information about "financial issues" or needs should be addressed
in the form. Other senators had no problem with the existing form.
Specific comments should be sent to Joel and he will assimilate all
comments for another review. An ancillary discussion of how the
"eCollege" training for the on-line MAT was had. Senators
involved in this training discussed pitfalls with software and
hardware, the huge time commitment, and the necessary learning
curve that will have to take place. 


5.2 New Masters in School Counseling. The presentation about
this new degree highlighted state employment needs for School
Counselors and the unique disability emphasis this degree would
offer in comparison with degrees at other institutes. Primary
discussion involved questions about FTE (2 will be added) and
comments from Provost Minahan indicating that this may be tough
to approve beyond campus because OSU has a comparable degree (that
ironically originated from WOU when we ran a joint education program
years ago). The faculty senate approved the new degree program. 


6.0 Consideration of New Business: none 


7.0 Reports of the Interinstitutional Faculty Senators: none 


8.0 Reports of Faculty Senate Sub-Committees 


8.1 Academic Requirements: None 


8.2 Curriculum Committee: 

Brian reminded everyone that next meeting
will be May 16. 


8.3 Graduate Study Committee: None 


8.4 Honors Committee: None 


8.5 International Education/Services Committee: None 


8.6 Academic Information Committee: None 


8.7 Jenson Lectureship Committee: 

Janeann reminded everyone
about the upcoming spring lectureship - now two weeks away. 


8.8 Honor Code Committee: Kim Jensen discussed the progress the
committee had made this year (based on the report handed out at
the last meeting). She pointed out perceptions that there should
be a "shift in culture" on campus to one of academic honesty,
pointing out student support for more guidance and awareness
when it comes to these issues. Other committee members
present described specific ideas, including more faculty orientation
on the topic (particularly for new faculty), encouraging all faculty to
"read the existing rules" at the beginning of classes in the fall, and
actually having students sign awareness statements. Some
discussion ensued about potential legal issues involved, although it
was pointed out that students enter into a contract via enrolling that
assumes they know about the existing code which is, in itself, part
of the contract. Some senators felt more student orientation
activities need to take place so that that awareness was made early.
Some senators felt we should be careful to emphasis "honesty" not
"dishonesty" in the language of any codes being considered. After
lengthy discussion, it was moved that the committee be continued next
year and charged with the task of defining specific measures to address
these issues and, in the long term, defining the most appropriate "code"
for this campus. This motion was approved. 


The Meeting was adjourned.


Leave a comment

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Camila published on April 25, 2000 9:53 AM.

Minutes 11 April 2000 was the previous entry in this blog.

Minutes 9 May 2000 is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.