Oakland University Senate
Tenth Meeting
April 19, 1975
Minutes
Present: Senators Barnard, Bertocci, Bricker, Burke, Coon, Covert, Dahlmann, Evans, Evarts, Feeman, Gardiner, R. Gerulaitis, Graber, Hetenyi, G. P. Johnson, Lind, Marz, Mascitelli, Matthews, McKay, Obear, O'Dowd, Orton, Pettengill, Seeber, Sherry, Solomon, Susskind, Titus, Torch, Torgoff, Williamson, Witt, Woodard and Young.
Absent: Senators Barthel, Beardman, Cherno, Coffman, Dovaras, Ettienne, Gibson, Harding, Heubel, Hough, Howes, Patrick Johnson, Kilburn, Kleckner, Light, Riley, Strauss, Sturner, Tagore, Tomboulian, Tripp, and White.
Commencing at 3:33 p.m.. President O'Dowd made informal announcements concerning the appointment of Ruth Adams to the Board of Trustees, an impending meeting with the Joint Capital Outlay Subcommittee, and the possibility of a nursing education program at Oakland.
The meeting was formally called to order at 3:53 p.m. The minutes of the meeting of April 5, 1973, were approved as moved by Mr. Torch, seconded by Mr. Pettengill
A. Old Business
1. Motion from the Graduate Council.
* THAT THE UNIVERSITY SENATE APPROVE THE MASTER OF ARTS IN TEACHING PROGRAM IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION AS PROPOSED BY THE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION AND APPROVED BY THE GRADUATE COUNCIL.
In response to questions about funding, Mr. Obear stated that funding for next year will be from the federal government, as it has been for the past two years. After that funding terminates, there will be a requirement for two faculty positions. The programs approved by the Graduate Council this year have been subjected to close scrutiny on a cost basis. Mr. O'Dowd stated that the institution should put resources where enrollment is. Further, one must consider what the institutional profile should be, and Mr. O'Dowd stated that he favored a diverse array of graduate programs. Mr. Hetenyi stated that state funding for graduate programs is at a higher rate than for undergraduate programs. (This is accomplished through a differential in the FYES conversion rate (24 vs. 3D.) Further, each academic program must contribute to the indirect cost pot of the University, so if the direct costs of the program are less than the total income generated (and the students drawn to the program are genuinely new students), then the program is cost effective.
Approved.
B. New Business
1. Proposal concerning a new university governance system as described by the University Council constitution.
Mr. Marz, a member of Governance Commission II, provided a description of the way in which the Commission operated and detailed some of the concerns which were covered during this process. He stated that he felt the council proposal would permit reasonable speed in acting on proposals and at the same time would provide more substantial input from the university community.
Mr. Matthews pointed out an "asymmetry" in the document. The sections of the constitution related to faculty are spelled out in great detail, whereas the sections related to other groups, particularly students, are not. It seems that the burden of being coherent is only upon the faculty. He further noted reservations about the segment in Article III concerning program accreditation. Mr. Marz responded that the "asymmetry" is no surprise to him or to the Commission, but that it exists because of the Commission's inability to find the elaborateness of the faculty governance machinery in the other governing groups. He agreed that such detailed procedures should exist for all groups. He further stated that the proposed method of handling tenure decisions is a mistake and should be corrected.
Mr. Johnson noted that during the North Central accreditation visit of 1967, the institution suffered substantial criticism since the Graduate Council (or its equivalent at that time) was a part of the Senate. Oakland's response to this criticism was to create a separate Graduate Council, and although the issue is probably less of a problem now than it was in 1967, Mr. Johnson perceived that the proposed constitution would erode some of the prerogatives of the Graduate Council and he opposed that erosion. Mr. Hetenyi stated that some concerns are general University concerns (grapes, the Vietnam war) so there is need for a broadly based body to deal with such issues. But judgmental matters of an academic nature are not a broad University concern and should not be dealt with by a body as broadly-based as the one proposed.
Mr. Sherry asked what the problem with the tenure committee as proposed was; he noted that the faculty would have a majority on the Council and thus would not be a small voice. Mr. Matthews stated that he did not like the amendment procedures proposed. Mr. Seeber said that the document is imperfect and should be laid aside. Mr. Obear noted that since no motion on the issue was ever offered, there is no need of formal action to lay the matter aside.
2. Health Sciences Professions
Mr. Obear, seconded by Mr. G. P. Johnson, moved:
* THAT THE SENATE BE AUTHORIZED TO MEET AS NECESSARY DURING THE SPRING, 1973, TERM TO ACT ON PROPOSALS CONCERNING THE HEALTH SCIENCES PROFESSIONS.
Because of the procedural character of this motion, it was eligible for final vote.
Mr. Obear distributed a handout (copy attached to the file copy of these minutes) describing proposals concerning health sciences professions, a School of General Studies, and a School of Presentational Arts and Sciences.
There was some discussion concerning the fact that currently existing academic units could perform some of the work involved with health sciences professions. Mr. Obear stated that several of the programs involved are being studied in the College of Arts and Sciences, but that the College may choose not to offer them. Mr. McKay asked Mr. Obear if he were saying that if Arts and Sciences does not act, the Senate will. Mr. Obear stated that he was asking for the option of bringing proposals on this subject to the Senate. Mr. McKay responded that he found that an "uncomfortable threat''. Mr. Obear stated that he did not intend his remarks to be interpreted in that way. Mr. Marz stated that he sensed the same problem with which Mr. McKay was concerned, but that he felt it provided due, not undue, pressure upon the College to act. Mr. McKay stated that in this body, as in the Arts and Sciences Assembly, someone might call a quorum. He expressed concern that a quorum is more difficult to achieve in the Assembly.
Mr. Sherry called the question. Mr. Hetenyi seconded this motion. Vote on the question passed 17 to 9. The main motion was then voted.
Approved.
3. Mr. Obear, seconded by Mr. Hetenyi, moved:
THAT THE SENATE BE AUTHORIZED TO MEET AS NECESSARY DURING THE SPRING, 1973, TERM TO ACT ON PROPOSALS CONCERNING A SCHOOL OF GENERAL STUDIES.
This procedural motion was eligible for final vote.
In response to Ms. Gerulaitis query concerning the urgency for a School of General Studies, Mr. Obear responded that the urgency involved here is to gain early program approval so as to be able to recruit during the fall, 1973, term for programs to commence in the fall of 1974. In response to a question from Ms. Gerulaitis concerning who is developing the proposal for a School of General Studies, Mr. Matthews invited the attention of the Senate to the third item of the handout. Mr. O'Dowd stated that the plan for the School of General Studies did not currently exist. Mr. Williamson stated that there is insufficient tine during the spring term to develop that plan.
Mr. Williamson, seconded by Mr. McKay, moved an amendment to change the word "act" to "discuss". The amendment was then reworded a bit by the seconder, with the approval of the mover, so that the amendment, if adopted, would cause the main motion to read:
THAT THE SENATE BE AUTHORIZED TO MEET AS NECESSARY DURING THE SPRING, 1973, TERM TO DISCUSS PROPOSALS CONCERNING A SCHOOL OF GENERAL STUDIES BUT NOT IMPLEMENT SUCH A SCHOOL.
Mr. O'Dowd urged the defeat of this motion. Mr. Obear called the question. The amendment carried by a vote of 13 to 12. Mr. McKay then urged the defeat of the motion as amended because of the constitutional provision that does not require a quorum at meetings during other than the fall and winter terms. Mr. O'Dowd stated that the institution needed every opportunity to build enrollment. He stated that the enrollment problem affected everyone on this campus. He continued by noting that his job is to build a viable institution and that because of external pressures he feels he cannot do that when the Senate chooses to do business only about seven months a year.
Mr. Lind, seconded by Mr. Solomon, moved to reconsider the amendment just voted. This motion to reconsider was approved on a voice vote. Mr. Williamson then called a quorum. A count of the house showed that a quorum was not present. The time was 5:32 p.m.
Robert H. Bunger
Secretary, University Senate
Office of the Provost/or
4/30/73