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 adjustments. 

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. 
President Youngblood 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: 
none. 

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: 
Karen Haberman (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: 
A lengthy 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 center. - 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 math). - 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 strongly considered. 

The meeting was adjourned.