Oakland University Senate

SECOND MEETING
Thursday October 19, 1978
3:15 p.m.
128, 129, 130 Oakland Center

MINUTES

Senators Present: Allvin, Arnold, Boulos, Burke, Cherno, Coffman, Eberwein, Gardiner, Ghausi, Goudsmit, Grossman, Halsted, Hampton, Hetenyi, Heubel, Hildum, Hohauser, Holladay, Jackson, Kleckner, Matthews, McKay, Moeller, Obear, O'Dowd, Osthaus, Ozinga, Riley, Rogers, Russell, Scherer, Stanovich, Stransky, Stutzki, Torch, Tower, Weiner, Williamson
Senators Absent: Bantel, Barry, Blatt, Braun, Butterworth, DeMent, Doherty, Edgerton, Evans, Felton, Hovanesian, Howes, Johnson, Jones, Merz, Pogany, Schwartz, Seeber, Wargo

Mr. O'Dowd presided during Old and New Business; Mr. Matthews presided during Special Business.

Mr. O'Dowd commented as follows:

1. The recent fire in the roof of the Club House was caused by faulty wiring and is covered by insurance. Damage wasn't extensive, but sufficient to preclude the building's use for some time.

2. We have had on file for years in Washington an application for federal funds to finance a married students unit. Unexpectedly we have received a loan of about $1,825,000 at 3% Interest for 48 units. We are uncertain about proceeding-; Board and legislative approval has not been even sought as yet.

The meeting was called to order at 3:30 p.m. The minutes of the meeting of September 12, 1978, were approved as distributed by voice vote upon motion of Mr. Tower seconded by Mr. Arnold.

Attention was directed to the agenda.

A. Old Business

Motion unamended concerning establishment of a program of studies leading to the Bachelor of Music degree (Allvin/Obear). Motion adopted without further discussion by voice vote as follows:

MOVED THAT THE UNIVERSITY SENATE RECOMMEND TO THE PRESIDENT AND THE BOARD THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PROGRAM OF UNDERGRADUATE STUDIES LEADING TO THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF MUSIC (B.Mus.). DEGREE REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS

In order to graduate with the Bachelor of Music degree, a student must:

1. Have successfully completed a minimum of 128 credits.
2. Have successfully completed or met all general undergraduate degree requirements.
3. Have successfully completed the program of instruction leading to the Bachelor of Music degree as prescribed by the School of Performing Arts with credit distribution as follows:
    a. Courses in Music 68-82 credits
    b. General Education 32 credits distributed from among courses designated for general education purposes by the College of Arts and Sciences and in accordance with the requirements of the various specializations within the degree program as follows:
        Art (other than Music) 4- 8 credits
        Foreign Language 8-16 credits
        History, and Literature or Philosophy 8 credits
        Mathematics, Science, Social Sciences;, Area Studies 4- 8 credits

4. Have been admitted to degree candidacy by the University and the School of Performing Arts, and to standing in at least one of the music specializations within the degree program as determined by the Department of Music.
5. Have successfully completed such auditions, competency examinations and attendance requirements as may be determined by the Department of Music with approval of the School of Performing Arts.
6. Have been in substantial compliance with all legal curricular requirements.

B. New Business

1. Nominations to vacant seats on standing committees moved by Mr. Tower, seconded by Mr. Grossman and confirmed by voice vote without opposition.

2. Motion concerning approval of the April 25, 1978 amended Constitution of the Library was moved by Mr. Gardiner and seconded by Hr. Hetenyi. Mrs. Eberwein inquired in what way was the new instrument different than the old? Mr. Gardiner said the amended constitution represented an attempt to update the previous document and to bring it into line with present Library organization. Mr. McKay requested that copies of the old constitution be distributed; Mr. Matthews promised to do so. Mr. Williamson and Mr. McKay expressed puzzlement over the relationship between the Library Council and the Faculty Assembly; what happens when there is conflict between them? Mr. Gardiner maintained that such conflicts did not occur. Mr. McKay wondered if there might not be wisdom in altering the make-up of the Council to provide faculty with a greater voice?  Mr. Williamson felt that the wording in the Constitution in regards to the Council was not adequate to spell out how it really operates, a view subscribed to by Mr. McKay. Ms. Rogers wondered why there was no graduate student membership designated; Mr. Pettengill replied that this had been considered but that the present student membership was adopted to provide flexibility. Mr. O'Dowd indicated that the Library faculty should consider the criticisms and return with emandations should it so wish.

No amendments to the motion were offered.

3. Motion concerning a change in the name of the School of Education was moved by Mr. Hetenyi and seconded by Mr. Williamson. Mr. Hetenyi spoke in favor; he enlarged upon but did not add to the formal comments found on the agenda. He emphasized that the change was largely for external purposes; that the proposal has the support of the APPC and of Dean Torch of the College of Arts and Sciences. Mr. Torch remarked that maybe "support" was too strong a word. Mr. Hetenyi then amended that at least Arts and Sciences was not opposed (laughter). Ms. Eberwein was concerned with the word "services." She felt the name of a school should at least denote that corpus of knowledge in which it offered instruction, which is not the case with the word "services." Mr. Hetenyi replied that the word "services" was increasingly being introduced to the names of various schools of education. Further Mr. Hetenyi continued, the original word suggested was objected to by Arts and Sciences. After some persuasion Mr. Hetenyi disclosed that the original word had been "development," which conflicted with usage adopted by the Department of Psychology. Mr. Grossman inquired whether the names of schools of education in Michigan had been changed in the suggested direction? Mr. Hetenyi replied he did not know, but would find out.

No amendments were offered.

Attention was then directed to the agenda.

C.  The reports of standing committees were noted as received. Mr. McKay inquired whether the APPC had taken action on its charge to review existing programs? Mr. Heubel replied it had considered the matter but that the pressure to review new programs had precluded more than that. Mr. McKay wondered whether the APPC ought to be enlarged? Mr. Heubel opined that was a possibility. Mr. Obear suggested the use of ad hoc subcommittees for this purpose. Mr. Obear further pointed out that the Graduate Council was studying a regular periodic review process for existing graduate programs.

Attention was then directed to the agenda.

D. The report of Steering Committee activities was noted as received without comment. Before attention turned to the agenda, Mr. Wllliamson (seconded by Mr. Cherno) offered a resolution as follows:

Resolved: That the hours between 12:00 noon and 2 p.m. on Tuesdays and Thursdays be free of scheduled classes; The Steering Committee is to direct consideration of this resolution to the appropriate committee(s). The Chair ruled that the resolution be referred to the Steering Committee without action.

Before attention turned to the agenda, Mr. McKay, supported by Ms. Eberwein requested that the Steering Committee consider setting aside a place on each agenda for the introduction of resolutions by senators. The Chair ruled that the matter be referred to the Steering Committee for consideration.

Attention was then directed to the agenda.

E. Special Business

Mr. Tower suggested the Senate discuss the implications for the future should any of the "tax limitation" proposals to amend the State Constitution pass in the upcoming election. After some discussion as to the appropriateness of motions in that vein, the Chair (Mr. Matthews) ruled that consideration of the University Planning Document 1978 was the order of business.

Mr. McKay pointed to IV.5, paragraph 1 of Principles and wondered why "new enrollment that permits faculty expansion" would improve "tenure opportunities for newer faculty."? Mr. O'Dowd replied that the larger the faculty, the more tenured members and Mr. Hetenyi observed the statement pointed to market conditions. Mr. Grossman expressed concern whether or not a tenure quota was implied in goal C4 of the Division of Academic Affairs Five-One Year Plan (Vol. II, UPD - 78, p.  45). Mr. Matthews pointed out that this statement derived from Vol. I, UPD - 78, IV 8 (Plans, 3), a fuller treatment of the matter. Mr. Tower explained  that FTE in this case meant all faculty, including part time, spring, summer, extension, evening instructors and that the 25% was the present pattern. Mr. McKay was concerned that in regards Vol. I, UPD - 78, IV - 3 General Plans 13 "study" be substituted for replace" in the first line. Mr. Matthews reviewed the status of UPD - 78 as an initial planning document, approved as such by the Senate May 13, 1978; in itself UPD - 78 was not amendable, but subsequent documents would incorporate changes suggested by Senate discussion. He agreed that the minutes, should reflect Mr. McKay's concern. Mr. Stutzki wondered how, in face of demographic projections, the University could both grow in enrollments and improve the quality of students admitted?  Mr. O'Dowd maintained it would be very difficult, but not impossible and that students as well as faculty would have to be enlisted to aid the professional staff in the admissions process. Ms. Eberwein inquired about the matter of the medical school; Mr. O'Dowd pointed out that Mr. Pak and the Council for Health Sciences was at work on the feasibility study, which includes all health education problems, not simply the medical school possibility. Mr. O'Dowd indicated a report to the Senate would be made on this subject at an appropriate future date.

Meeting was adjourned at 5:10 p.m. upon proper motion duly seconded.