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.