Faculty Senate Meeting Minutes 
October 10, 2000 3:30 p.m. 
Columbia Room 

1.0 Call to Order 

2.0 Call of the Roll was automatic. The following faculty senate members were absent: Joel Alexander, David Olson, and Darryl Thomas. Mickey Pardew substituted for Linda Keller. Guests included Bob Turner (IFS Senator), President Youngblood, Provost Minahan, and Dean Chadney. 

3.0 Previous minutes were approved without correction. John adjusted the agenda by allowing Student Body President Andy High* to speak first because of another pending engagement. 

4.0 Reports of the Presidents 

4.3* Student Body President 
Andy High summarized priority activities: campus diversity, voter registration, and information about ballot initiatives. 

4.1. Senate President 
John Leadly discussed general information and some possible agenda items for the coming year: (a) Representatives from the ASWOU Senate and the Statesman Journal have asked to attend Faculty Senate meetings. (b) Any issue faculty wish to raise may be brought up with John, members of the Executive Committee (Mike Ward, David Hargreaves, Sarah Boomer, Joel Alexander, Janeanne Rockwell- Kincanon, and John Leadley), or as "new business" during Senate meetings. (c) General agenda items include: Writing at WOU, Honor Code, and sweatshop labor issues. (d) Specific representation issues include: implications of the consolidation of divisions in the College of Education and TR faculty representation on Senate. 

4.1 President of Western Oregon University 
Dr. Youngblood reported that the unofficial current enrollment is 4594 students. Tentatively, eight positions have been authorized in terms of recruitment: seven in LAS and one in Education. Decisions regarding these authorizations were made based on recommendations by the Deans. Funds for these positions will be derived from adjunct positions, retirements/departures, or revenue from any enrollment increases. Dr. Youngblood also discussed funding issues regarding paid services provided for deaf and disabled students in light of substantial increases among this population of students at WOU. Currently, OUS offers no special blocks for such students, despite the legal obligation to provide such services. The projected needs for WOU in this category may approach $500,000 this year alone, significantly up from last year's $200,000. Dr. Youngblood is taking steps to secure assistance with the Chancellor's Office given WOU's unique and important role in educating students with such needs. 

5.0 Consideration of Old Business 

5.1 Proposal to require a C- or better in WR 135 
John stated in the original agenda that Humanities would propose withdrawing this motion in favor of developing a more comprehensive package to deal with the writing issue. Carol Harding lead a discussion of this proposal and encouraged senators relate comments to her to facilitate developing a broader plan - both at this Senate meeting and beyond. Senate discussion included many points that included: 
(a) Transfer student credit. Some students at other institutions take a year of 100-level writing courses that encompass composition, expository writing, and general research paper development and transfer to WOU, receiving credit for only WR135 (and no upper division W coursework). Concerns about this assignment of transfer credit were mentioned. 
(b) Better placement advising at SOAR, including pre-testing students for placement into WR135. Carol stated that many freshmen are already being pre-tested. She also reported that only a limited number of students in WR135, after two weeks of class, have been recommended to move into WR115. 
(c) The content of WR135 and WR115 and what is "needed." Carol stressed that WR115 is NOT a grammar course and faculty (like me and a few others) who keep refering to it as such - and as necessary remediation for perceived bad writing among students who skip it - need to understand that. WR115 is a course in composition and construction and, as such, can not fulfill LACC requirements from the philosophical standpoint that it does not go beyond construction into comparative or expository writing (as does WR135). That WR115 does not fulfill LACC, however, means that students may tend to avoid taking it because it "does nothing for them." How to rectify these realities is the question. 
(d) Advanced W courses (too many issues): Are they working? How do we know? Unbeknownst to a few people, WR135 is a pre-requisite for all advanced "W's" but it is not being enforced at the level of registration. "W" courses are supposed to be held at 25 students but this is also not happening across campus. Enrollment, retention, and staffing implications for the 25- limit issue are serious points. Potential enrollment implications for the pre-requisite enforcement were also raised. The differential offering of "W" courses across campus and the "burden" this creates for certain departments was also a serious point (which, at times, went hand in hand with the 25-limit). What are alternatives to the current system (another LACC in writing? If so, would it integrate and emphasize composition/basic writing, research, or both? And, if so, how would it be staffed?). 
(e) Specific Support for "W" Courses: Some faculty expressed the need for more support in teaching "W" courses - either directly from writing professors or in the form of a professional writing center. These concerns were raised because of perceptions that the "mission" of "W" courses (teaching writing in the discipline) seemed, in many cases, to be overshadowed by technical complications (i.e. construction, draft editting, etc.). 
(f) Approval and designation of "W" courses. Perceptions and concerns about this were briefly discussed. Carol also encouraged all faculty and divisions to more carefully assess their existing coursework (with an emphasis on special projects or thesis requirements) with an eye for "W" courses to alleviate some of the above problems. 

6.0 Consideration of New Business 

6.1 Report from Committee on Committees 
Chehalis Strapp distributed an extensive list of Campus Committees (members and vacancies). These were changed following examination of committee representation given the consolidation of Elementary and Secondary Education. Please review and send nominees to Chehalis. 

6.2 Report from ad hoc Honor Code Committee 
Kim Jensen reported on last year's activities. The committee supports forming a clear campus-wide policy about academic integrity, with an emphasis on "positive sanctions" - although details about administration of the "honor code" and some new issues regarding internet and technology-oriented issues remain unclear. Kim and others stressed that faculty, in the mean time, use class-time and syllabi to communicate existing policies (in the Student Handbook and made available by Mike Walsh annually). Kim stressed that discussions last year illustrated a large degree of diversity among faculty with respect to handling incidents of academic dishonesty. It is hoped, too, that general campus activities (i.e. orientation) will better familiarize students with not only the current policies but any new "codes" that comes from this process. The committee will report to the Senate on specific proposals, including a draft Honor Code, later this year. 

7.0 Reports of the Interinstitutional Faculty Senators 
Bob Turner distributed a summary of the October meeting at Klamath Falls. Recurring points included the proposed Bend campus and distance education, both against the general backdrop of funding and infrastructure issues. Not related to this meeting, Irja Galvan's IFS space must be filled in January, 2001. Please provide nominations to John Leadley.