Oakland University Senate
Third Meeting
Thursday, November 18, 1976
3:00 p.m.
128-130 Oakland Center
MINUTES
Members Present: Allvin, Atlas, Barnard, Bertocci, Burke, Coffman, DeMont, Doane, Eberwein, Felton, Flynn, Fuller, Hetenyi, Heubel, Hitchingham, Johnson, Keelin, Ketchum, Kuczynski, Liboff, Matthews, McKay, McKinley, Moeller, Obear, O'Dowd, Riley, Russell, Scherer, Shacklett, Sponseller, Stonner, Swartz, Taylor, Torch, Tower, Tucker, Warren and Wllliamson
Members Absent: Barren, Burdick, Cameron, Cherno, Ellens, Evarts, Freeman, Gardiner, Hammerle, Keegan, Moberg, Pogany, Ruscio, Schuldenberg, Schwartz, Seeber, Swanson, Weng, White and Witt
Mr. O'Dowd presided.
The President opened the meeting with Informal comments concerning the Michigan Efficiency Task Force which recently surveyed the University's operations. In general the METF reports favorably upon Oakland's "efficiency," but does recommend certain improvements. Notable among these is the suggestion that the proposed Library addition be built in several stages over a number of years, rather than in one stage and that plans for COB II be scrapped in favor of renovation of Vandenberg for classroom-offices. Mr. O'Dowd assured the Senate these suggestions would be resisted. The METF also recommended improved planning (the University Planning Committee is already at work, building upon the MBO base), better computerized management systems (already underway), more adequate use of student records and improved Employment Relations (who would quarrel with that?). The Task Force also recommended disposal (sale) of surplus land, an item aimed at the faculty subdivision, primarily; this matter has been periodically discussed by the Board for some time. The President was emphatic that the METF's recommendation would not result in the sale of the whole south half of the campus.
Mr. O'Dowd commented upon item one under the For the Information of the Senate slot: He will recommend to the Board on November 30 an athletics fee levied upon undergraduates only. (Those Senators who were awake during these proceedings will instantly recognize that strict chronology has been violated by inserting this matter at this point In the minutes. The President's remarks concerning the athletics fee were actually made at the end of the meeting. For ease of composition, the Secretary records them here; he would appreciate the Senate's indulgence.) .
Mr. McKay requested information on Items 2. and 3. under For the Information of the Senate. In response Ms. Eberwein reported on GCO. An amicable meeting between the Steering Committee subcommittee and Messrs. Lewis and Saltzman has been held and informal agreement on modified language for several Constitutional articles and clauses was reached. A final meeting is expected soon. Assuming agreement and Steering Committee support, the new language will be presented to the Senate in winter semester in the form of proposed Constitutional amendments.
Ms. Hitchingham then reported on the activities of the PRP (Presidential Review Procedures) subcommittee which is moving on two levels: It has contacted the executive committees of all organized faculties requesting suggestions as to how to organize PRP at the same time as it has requested a meeting with appropriate members of the Board. The Steering Committee hopes to report progress at the December meeting of the Senate.
Thanks to Mesdames Eberwein and Hitchingham were extended.
The meeting was then called to formal order at 3:45 p.m.
The minutes of the meeting of October 21, 1976, were approved as distributed by voice vote. Attention was then turned to the formal agenda.
I. Committee Reports:
1. Mr. Bezdek for the Academic and Career Advising Committee reported satisfactory progress in implementation of the advising procedures endorsed by the Senate last year.
2. Mr. Bertocci for the Academic Conduct Committee reported that this term three hearings had already been held and that the Committee was deep in a study of its own procedures. Discussion was general but also intense. The Senate expressed desire for further discussion on several academic conduct issues. This will be arranged in the form of a formal proposal on procedures to be presented by the Academic Conduct Committee later in the year.
3. Mr. Moeller for the Academic Policy Committee described the agenda for this year and the Senate was properly impressed by the scope of the Committee's activities; the Committee's recent interpretation of the "double baccalaureate" rule - that a student could not earn two undesignated baccalaureates within a single college or school - occasioned interested discussion.
4. Mr. Young for the Admissions Committee reported continued study of admissions data aimed at issuance of a comprehensive report later in the year.
The Senate thanks Messrs. Bezdek, Bertocci, Moeller and Young (and through them their Committees) for their service.
I. Old Business:
1. From the agenda the Burke, Schwartz motion as amended by McKay, Eberwein.
The McKay, Eberwein amendment was considered first and after discussion of the relation of the amendment to the FRPC, the CAPs and the PPC, it carried by voice vote.
The original Burke, Schwartz motion as amended was then considered. Mr. Liboff seconded by Ms. Scherer offered an amendment to delete "AND METHODS'' from item one of the main motion. Messrs. Burke and Wllliamson tried to assure Mr. Liboff that it was not the intent of the motion to impose standardized teaching methods on all academic units. The amendment was defeated by voice vote.
Mr. Burke then explained the main motion as envisioned by the Committee on Teaching and Learning, its original sponsor. He admitted that item three providing for class visitation by colleagues was extremely controversial, but argued that the only way for a colleague to judge another colleague's teaching is by direct observation. Mr. Swartz evinced dismay that the motion contained no reference to the procedures that would be used in this delicate area. Mr. Bertocci expressed deep concern for the psychological hazards bound to be experienced by a junior faculty member undergoing this kind of inspection by a senior. Mr. Tucker (who is assuming the chair of the Teaching and Learning Committee) associated himself with the positions of Messrs. Bertocci and Swartz and articulated puzzlement about the ambiguity of the Senate's relations with FRPC. Mr. Tucker then moved (seconded by Mr. Ketchum) to refer the motion back to committee for further consideration.
This motion, ruled procedural, was supported by Ms. DeMont and by Mr. Fuller who pointed out the issue of teaching evaluation was being considered by Student Congress. The question was called and the motion to refer back to committee carried by voice vote and it was so ordered sine die.
Upon motion of Mr. Hetenyi, seconded by Mr. Obear, the meeting was adjourned at 5:05 p.m.
GTM:jb
Office of the Provost
11/23/76