Oakland University Senate
Thursday, April 8, 1982
Eighth Meeting
128, 129, 130 Oakland Center
MINUTES
Senators Present: Akers, Appleton, Arnold, Boulos, Briggs-Bunting, Brown, Champagne, Chipman, Copenhaver, Cowlishaw, Downing, Eberwein, Eklund, Eliezer, Feeman, Frampton, Gerulaitis, Ghausi, Gregory, Grossman, Hammerle, Hetenyi, Heubel, Hildebrand, Horwitz, Howes, Ketchum, Kleckner, Lambric, Lindell, Mallett, Miller, Moeller, Pine, Pino, Russell, Scherer, Sevilla, Shallow, Somerville, Stamps, Stanovich, Stokes, Witt.
Senators Absent: Burdick, Christina, Clark, Coppola, Dawson, Gardiner, Hightower, Kurzman, Otto, Pak, Rhadigan, Sakai, Schwartz, Strauss, Swartz, Tripp, Wilson.
Mr. Kleckner called the meeting to order at 3:14 p.m., thinking that he spied a quorum. The Senate proceeded at once to approval of the minutes of its March 11, 1982, session without additions, deletions, or corrections (Moved, Mr. Hetenyi; Seconded, Mr. Arnold). That duty accomplished, the group turned attention to the rather complicated item of old business regarding catalog application.
Following the guidelines set down by Parliamentarian Heubel, the friends of the main motion (Moved, Mr. Dawson; Seconded, Mr. Akers) proceeded to perfect it by a process of amendment. The Grossman/Gerulaitis amendment to delete the next-to-last sentence of the main motion evoked no discussion but a number of dissenting votes. A show of hands, however, displayed clear majority support of the amendment. Similar lack of debate attended presentation of the Dawson/Briggs-Bunting amendment to perfect the main motion by expunging its final sentence. This amendment passed by a voice vote. Having demonstrated so forcibly its commitment to the aesthetic axiom that less is more, the Senate then confronted its revised main motion:
MOVED that the graduation requirements�general education, major, and overall degree�for an undergraduate student shall be those stated in the University catalog extant at the time of graduation unless the student specifies an earlier catalog. The specified catalog may not predate the first semester or session of the student's matriculation and may not be more than six years old at the time of graduation.
Whereupon, Mr. Appleton, who had been expected to propose the substitute motion presented in the agenda, distributed dittoed copies of a slightly modified substitute resolution with a second sentence improved through consultation with Mr. Witt. Mr. Witt signified his approval by seconding the new substitute motion.
MOVED that the graduation requirements�general education, major, and overall degree�for an undergraduate student shall be those stated in the University catalog extant at the time of graduation, unless the student specifies an earlier catalog. The specified catalog may not predate the one in effect during the first semester or session of the student's matriculation at Oakland University and not more than 6 years may have lapsed between the effective date of the catalog and the time of graduation. In addition, any school or college is free to specify that students changing enrollment into one of its programs from another school or college, or from undecided status, may not follow the requirements in a catalog earlier than that in effect at the time of this change in enrollment.
Mr. Heubel opened discussion of this "purple prose" by asking how the substitute resolution differed from the now-truncated main motion. Mr. Appleton explained that his motion served two purposes: to satisfy the professional schools that they can keep up with the state of their arts and to protect other units which have less interest in continually updating requirements from forcing students who transfer into their programs to adhere to the latest catalog. He reported that he had talked with Mr. Horwitz, Ms. Clark, and Mr. Sudol to establish that his motion was acceptable to the University Committee on Undergraduate Instruction, which had introduced the original motion, and to those persons who had most vigorously opposed the original motion in earlier Senate debate. Mr. Kleckner affirmed that the substitute motion was acceptable to UCUI members. Mr. Grossman reported that the Advising Committee was also content with the substitute motion; although its members still felt some pressure on undecided students to declare a pre-professional major early to catch hold of the earliest possible catalog. Mr. Appleton recognized this possibility but felt that his motion was the lesser of two evils in respect to undecided students. Following this discussion, the Senate unanimously voted to substitute the Appleton/Witt motion for the perfected main motion and then unanimously approved the substitute motion itself.
Mr. Akers, seconded by Ms. Gerulaitis, then moved that certain faculty members be confirmed as appointed to Senate standing committees for terms specified in the agenda for this meeting. Mr. Kleckner explained that the Steering Committee wishes to deliberate on a possible merger of the Admissions and Financial Aids committees and has therefore refrained from filling vacancies on either committee until the fall. There was no discussion of committee nominations, and the motion carried with unanimous support.
Consistent with this year's general pattern, no Senator offered a private resolution for the good of the order, so Mr. Kleckner proceeded at once to comment on two information items. The amendment to the Senate Constitution which establishes the Provost as presiding officer has now been ratified by the faculty and will soon be brought to the Board of Trustees. Meanwhile, this meeting introduced the new arrangement, with President Champagne content to participate as a spectator in the catalog controversy.
Mr. Kleckner reported that the Steering Committee has asked the Academic Policy and Planning Committee to make a proposal to the Senate with regard to additional Senate meetings through May so that the Senate may render advice concerning recommendations of the Committee on Academic Mission and Priorities, specifically those recommendations involving phase-outs of academic programs and creation of new academic units. Only matters requiring immediate attention will be the subject of these May meetings; other issues which allow for longer deliberation will be considered in accordance with the usual governance calendar. The Senate will meet again on April 15 and 22 to attend to four items of business now coming forward from committees. Mr. Kleckner expected the APPC to propose an extended schedule of spring sessions.
Having completed the business portion of the meeting, Mr. Kleckner yielded the chair to Mr. Champaign for Presidential remarks, chiefly related to the budget. The President reported that the necessary legislative committees had just approved the governor's executive order which withholds funding from institutions of higher education. Oakland will start its new fiscal year with $2.75 million less than we started this year; this is less of a cut than originally projected but still substantial. The governor offers a "good-faith assurance" that cut funds will eventually be restored but persons planning university finances are guessing that we should expect a zero-base budget change for next year, perhaps augmented by restoration of about three-quarters of the funds now being cut. The Executive Budget Committee is formulating plans in expectation of slightly less money next year than this. The legislature is still debating the income tax increase, which seems unlikely to pass, but the executive order stands firm.
Mr. Champagne noted that a number of state colleges and universities are now announcing program cutbacks. He is pleased with Oakland's posture in the way we have studied ourselves through a comparatively open process: the CAMP report and Senate and student hearings on it. Once the recommendations from the Senate come in, he expects the Provost to move rapidly toward implementation.
Several questions arose concerning the budget. Mr. Ketchum inquired about the financial health of the University through through the rest of the current fiscal year and learned that we are doing better than might be expected; President Champagne expects to carry over some funds into the new fiscal year. He sees no cash-flow problems now, nor does he anticipate them next year even if the supposedly temporary cutbacks should never be refunded. It would bother him very much to involve the University in a cycle of of borrowing. Mr. Arnold then asked what base is being used for zero-base budgeting. Unfortunately, the base will be this year's budget after all cuts. On that dismal note. Senators streamed towards the door, and the meeting officially adjourned at 3:40 p.m. (Moved, Mr. Hetenyi; Seconded Mr. Kleckner)
Respectfully submitted:
Jane D. Eberwein
Secretary to the University Senate