Oakland University Senate
Second Meeting
Thursday, October 21, 1976
3:00 p.m.
128-130 Oakland Center
MINUTES
Members Present: Senators Atlas, Barren, Bertocci, Burdick, Burke, Cameron, Doane, Eberwein, Ellens, Flynn, Freeman, Hammerle, Hetenyi, Hitchingham, Keegan, Ketchum, Kuczynski, Liboff, Matthews, McKay, McKinley, Obear, Pogany, Russell, Schuldenberg, Schwartz, Seeber, Shacklett, Sponseller, Stonner, Swartz, Taylor, Torch, Tower, Tucker, Warren, White, Wllliamson and Witt
Members Absent: Senators Allvin, Barnard, Cherno, Coffman, DeMont, Evarts, Felton, Fuller, Gardiner, Heubel, Johnson, Keelin, Moberg, Moeller, O'Dowd, Riley, Ruscto, Scherer, Swanson and Weng
Mr. Obear presided and called the meeting to order at 3:25 p.m. without opening comments. Mr. Shacklett Introduced Mr. Greg Flynn as a new student member replacing Mr. Jack Schluckbier who has graduated.
Mr. Matthews informed him that upon written notice from Congress, Mr. Flynn would be duly seated; in the meantime he was welcome to the meeting but without vote.
Mr. Seeber seconded by Mr. Ellens moved approval of the minutes of the meeting of September 16, 1976. Ms. Schwartz questioned the absence, from the agenda, of the Torch, Burke amendment mentioned on page three of the minutes. Mr. Obear explained that the amendment was omitted from the agenda by error, and would be the first amendment to be considered once attention was turned to the formal agenda. The minutes were approved by voice vote.
I. Old Business:
Third (Torch, Burke) motion to amend the main motion by changing the phrase "two years" to "one year." (see comments above)
Mr. Torch argued that if two-years were allowed to collect data, another year would be needed to evaluate, a total of three; by reducing to one year, the total time needed would be reduced to two. Mr. Stern maintained that two years were needed for a thorough study. Much general discussion of the entire motion ensued, with problems of precise definition of teaching effectiveness receiving the most attention. Mr. Lilliston, invited to speak, attempted to summarize the characteristics of the questionnaire: Items I through 7 are core questions of the sort found on all such questionnaires in use around the country; Items 8 and 9 attempt to elicit general impressions of the course and instructor; Items 10 through 13 are designed to provide information about the student filling in the questionnaire which is important in interpreting the results of the questionnaire. Mr. Torch asked whether one year would be enough time to obtain the data. Mr. Lilliston replied affirmatively.
Upon call of the question, the Torch, Burke amendment carried by voice vote.
Second Heubel, Tucker motion to amend the main motion was then considered and carried by voice vote.
First Heubel, DeMont motion to amend the main motion was then considered.
Discussion was general finally centering around whether the questionnaire just discussed would be used in the survey. Mr. Russell seconded by Mr. Seeber offered an amendment to the Heubel, DeMont amendment to the effect that after the word QUESTIONNAIRE there be inserted the following parenthesis:
(i.e.. THE QUESTIONNAIRE CONSISTING OF THE THIRTEEN QUESTIONS DESCRIBED ON PAGES ONE AND TWO OF THE SENATE AGENDA OF OCTOBER 21, 1976)
Vigorous discussion not always strictly germane to the Russell, Seeber amendment to the Heubel, DeMont amendment, was permitted by indulgence of the Chair.
Finally, the question on the Russell, Seeber amendment was called and the motion carried by voice vote.
Attention was then directed to the Heubel, DeMont amendment as amended by Russell Seeber.
Mr. Torch seconded by Ms. Hitchingham offered an amendment to the Heubel, DeMont amendment which after being perfected by the advice of several colleagues such that the Heubel, DeMont amendment as amended by Russell, Seeber would read as follows (new wording offered by Torch, Hitchingham underlined):
THE UNIVERSITY SENATE RECOMMENDS THAT A QUESTIONNAIRE (i.e., THE QUESTIONNAIRE CONSISTING OF THIRTEEN QUESTIONS DESCRIBED ON PAGES ONE AND TWO OF THE SENATE AGENDA OF OCTOBER 21, 1976) ON STUDENT PERCEPTION OF TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS BE PREPARED, ADMINISTERED BY THE TEACHING AND LEARNING COMMITTEE FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AND THEN EVALUATED BY THE COMMITTEE STRICTLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT THIS QUESTIONNAIRE CAN BE USED FOR MAKING RELIABLE ASSESSMENTS OF PERCEPTIONS OF TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS ON A UNIVERSITY-WIDE BASIS.
The Torch, Hitchingham motion to amend carried by voice vote.
Attention was then directed to the Heubel, DeMont motion to amend as amended which motion carried by voice vote.
Main motion 3. (Burke, Torch) from the agenda of September 16, 1976, New Business as amended by Torch, Burke, Heubel, Tucker; Russell, Seeber; Torch, Hitchingham; and Heubel, DeMont was then presented for final vote. Upon division of the house the vote was 20 aye,. 7 nay and 3 abstentions and the motion carried as follows:
*THE UNIVERSITY SENATE RECOMMENDS THAT A QUESTIONNAIRE (i.e., THE QUESTIONNAIRE CONSISTING OF THIRTEEN QUESTIONS DESCRIBED ON PAGES ONE AND TWO OF THE SENATE AGENDA OF OCTOBER 21, 1976) ON STUDENT PERCEPTION OF TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS BE PREPARED, ADMINISTERED BY THE TEACHING AND LEARNING COMMITTEE FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AND THEN EVALUATED BY THE COMMITTEE STRICTLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT THIS QUESTIONNAIRE CAN BE USED FOR MAKING RELIABLE ASSESSMENTS OF PERCEPTIONS OF TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS ON A UNIVERSITY-WIDE BASIS.
II. New Business;
Before motion 1. of New Business was formally introduced, Mr. McKay offered a procedural motion seconded by Mr. Freeman as follows:
*MOVED THAT THE SENATE REQUESTS THAT THE STEERING COMMITTEE CONSIDER THE TOPIC OF PROCEDURES FOR REVIEW OR SELECTION OF A PRESIDENT OF THE UNIVERSITY WITH A VIEW TO PLACING AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA FOR SENATE DEBATE.
General and at time heated discussion of a constitutional nature followed. Mr. Ellens seconded by Ms. Eberwein moved that the Senate immediately consider
Mr. McKay-s procedural motion.
The Ellens, Eberwein motion to consider carried by division of the house 24 aye 2 nay, and 2 abstentions.
Mr. McKay's motion was then carried by voice vote.
Attention was then directed to motion 1., New Business moved by Mr. Burke, seconded by Ms. Schwartz.
Mr. McKay offered an amendment seconded by Ms. Eberwein so as to insert the words TO THE FRPC AND THE CAPS after the word "RECOMMENDS" and before the word "THAT" in the first line of the motion.
To the pleasure of most, the meeting was adjourned at 5:05 p.m. upon motion of Ms. Schwartz, seconded by Mr. Hetenyi and carried by voice (somewhat hoarse) vote.
GTM:jb
Office of the Provost
10/25/76
*Motions passed at this meeting