Senate Minutes&nbsp;<br>
April 24, 2001&nbsp;<br>
 Meeting
3:30 p.m.&nbsp;<br>
 Columbia Room&nbsp;
<p>

1.0  Call to Order&nbsp;</p>
<p>

2.0  Call of the Roll was automatic.  Joel Alexander, Kevin Helppie, 
David Janoviak, David Olson, Darryl Thomas, and Tamina Toray 
were absent.  Wangeci Gatimu substituted for Adele Schepige.&nbsp;</p>
<p>  

3.0  Corrections of Minutes/Agenda Adjustments.&nbsp;<br>
  It was 
proposed that we clearly state and record that the recent 
course/credit increases proposed by Psychology would not require 
hiring any additional faculty.   There were no agenda adjustments.&nbsp;</p>
<p>

4.0  Reports of the Presidents&nbsp;</p>
<p>

4.1  Senate President:&nbsp;<br>
  John discussed potential concerns about 
recently passed and pending program course/credit increases (e.g. 
Psychology and Art History).  These included (1) the need for an 
organized campus-wide discussion and effort if more programs 
decide to comparably increase course credit because of space and 
scheduling problems that will occur;  (2) clarification about FTE 
assignments for faculty and adjuncts for the extra hour of class 
time;  and (3)  discussion about the nature of extra contact hours 
in terms of both FTE assignments and academic standards.  
Chehalis asked for clarification about the state of the Psychology 
proposal and John affirmed that it had been signed off and moved 
along.  John also distributed and briefly summarized the proposal 
for the Writing-Intensive Program Oversight Committee and a 
spreadsheet that summarizes his research of LACC hours and 
"double dipping" issues at other OUS institutions.  Finally, John 
reminded everyone that new senators must attend the first May 
meeting.&nbsp;</p>
<p>  

4.2  President of WOU&nbsp;<br>

President Youngblood mentioned increased discussions at the 
Chancellor's Office regarding moving OUS to semesters.  This will 
not happen during the upcoming year.  It may be tried as a pilot 
program at Southern first.  She also said that paperwork describing 
use of the former library will be provided at the next meeting.&nbsp;</p>
<p>  

4.3  Student Body President&nbsp;<br>

Andy mentioned the upcoming international night, elections, and 
encouraged faculty to promote voting.&nbsp;</p>
<p>

5.0  Consideration of Old Business&nbsp;</p>
<p>

5.1  Proposal:&nbsp;<br>
  C- or Better in WR135/transfer equivalent for LACC. 
This passed unanimously.&nbsp;</p>
<p>

5.2   Proposal:&nbsp;<br>
  Upper division WR courses for WI credit.  It was 
moved that this be tabled until the WI Program Oversight 
Committee issues are addressed.  This motion to table was 
passed 13 to 2.&nbsp;</p>
<p>  

5.3  Proposal:&nbsp;<br>
  Reduction in the minimum graduation requirements 
from 192 to 180.  After considerable discussion weighing both the 
academic and potential "deception" issues of this proposal, the 
Senate uninamously passed this proposal.  It was suggested that 
a caveat along the lines of "some programs may require more 
credits for graduation" be included in the catalog alongside the 
stated minimum.&nbsp;</p>
<p>  

6.0  Consideration of New Business&nbsp;</p>
<p>

6.1  WRC Committee&nbsp;<br>

Peter Callero distributed a question/answer summary of the WRC 
written by this committee.  He also provided a negative letter from a 
WOU donor about the WRC and a recently passed OUS policy 
regarding business and impartiality at OUS campuses.  He 
described international human rights issues and violations that 
warrant consideration of joining WRC.  He said that the purpose of 
this committee regarded WRC only.  Hence, the motion on the 
table is whether or not to join WRC.  Discussion and questions 
raised by the Senate included:  What is the scope of the problem 
here?  Can we govern our own choices through the bookstore and 
athletic programs?  Does the WRC actually deal with the smaller 
companies with whom we do business?  Why not join any number 
of other groups or support other causes (Greenpeace etc.?)?&nbsp;</p>
<p>  

6.2  Art History Credit Change.&nbsp;<br>

Art History explained that the proposed program change will not 
affect the LACC because the total Creative Arts LACC credits will 
not be changed.  Specifically, Creative Arts proposed changing the 
wording of the LACC requirement that students take at least one 
course in three different areas.  This would allow a student to take 
a 4 credit Art History course, a 3 credit course in another area, and 
two one credit courses in a third, keeping the total at 9.  
Several questions along the lines of those John raised during his 
initial address to the senate were discussed but, unfortunately, the 
move to extend the meeting beyond 5 o'clock was not approved.  
The meeting adjourned without clarity about the Art History 
proposal, particularly so given the May 1 due date extension given 
to Art History.  As people were leaving (on this notably sunny day), 
this need was pointed out and it is likely the vote will be made in 
the Executive Committee.</p>