Oakland University Senate

Thursday, September 22, 1983
First Meeting
128, 129, 130 Oakland Center

MINUTES

Senators Present: Appleton, Boulos, Briggs-Bunting, Burke, Bledsoe, Champagne, Chapman-Moore, Chipman, Christina, Copenhaver, Coppola, Downing, Easterly, Eberwein, Edgerton, Eliezer, Evarts, Feeman,  Frankie, Gerulaitis, Grossman, Hamilton, Hartman, Heubel, Horwitz, Hough, Howe, Kleckner, Lindell, McCabe, McClory, Moorhouse, Pine, Russell, Scherer, Schimmelman, Schwartz, Shichi, Snider-Feldmesser, Splete, Strauss, Titus, Tomboulian, Tracy, Tripp, Williamson, Windeknecht, Witt, Workman, Zorn
Senators Absent: Bertocci, Brown, Chagnon-Royce, Evans, Federlein, Ghausi, Hammerle, Ketchum, Moore, Pino

SUMMARY OF ACTIONS:
1. Election of Steering Committee for 1983-85: N. Boulos, D. Downing, J. Eberwein, R. Hough, H. Splete, T. Windeknecht (Mr. Witt, Elections Committee Chair)
2. Motion to amend the University Senate Constitution with respect to the Graduate Council. Moved, Mr. Feeman; seconded  Ms. Gerulaitis. First reading.
3. Motion to establish the Graduate Council as a new subcommittee of the Senate. Moved, Mr. Feeman; seconded:. Ms. Gerulaitis. First reading.
4.  Motion to appoint J. Curtis Chipman as chair of the Academic Policy and Planning Committee, Moved, Ms. Boulos; seconded, Mr. Grossman. Approved.

Mr. Kleckner called the meeting to order at 3:15 p.m. and initiated the new Senate term by welcoming the entire body, extending particular greetings to student Senators and those new to the University: Ms. Frankie and Mr. Hartman. Anticipating matters soon to be brought forward, he indicated that minutes of the April 26, 1983, meeting would go out in the next mailing for consideration on October 13 and announced that nominations of persons to fill vacancies on Senate committees would also be made at the next meeting; such recommendations must come from the new Steering Committee about to be elected. Appointments already made for the dispatch of Senate business include those of Ms. Eberwein as Secretary and Mr. Heubel as Parliamentarian.

With no old business to encumber the newly-elected Senate, attention turned directly to the first item of new business; election of a six-member Steering Committee to serve from 1983 to 1985. Mr. Witt, veteran chair of the Elections Committee, presided over the proceedings. When six names representing the mandatory range of faculties had been placed in contention, Mr. Moorhouse called for a close to nominations and won the concurrence of his colleagues. The following persons, therefore, were elected by acclamation:
Nadia Boulos, School of Nursing
David Downing, College of Arts and Sciences
Jane Eberwein, College of Arts and Sciences
Robbin Hough, School of Economics and Management
Howard Splete, School of Human and Educational Services
Thomas Windeknecht, School of Engineering and Computer Science

 Mr. Kleckner invited the Steering Committee to remain after the meeting to begin its work.

 Mr. Feeman then introduced two motions regarding the Graduate Council, both of them seconded by Ms. Gerulaitis. He prefaced discussion of specific motions with a historical review of the evolution of the current Graduate Council into a body roughly parallel with the Senate and of its internal deliberations and actions in preparing the recommendations now offered for its drastic reconstitution. A committee chaired by Mr. Chipman and composed of representatives from all schools offering graduate programs began work last November to clarify the legal status of the Graduate Council with respect to the Senate. Although Mr. Feeman indicated that no actual harm had come from blurring of authority, he emphasized that the motions now brought to the Senate following committee and Council debate and a mail referendum of affected academic units substantially strengthens the position of the Senate as the governance body having authority over all academic programs at every level. He reported that titular changes within the proposal recognize that Oakland University does not now have nor anticipates in the near future a Graduate School per se with an organized faculty and a dean who exercises major influence on the hiring and firing of that faculty. He stressed that the Graduate Council would no longer be perceived as a governance body parallel to the Senate but as a standing committee answerable to it.

Some discussion greeted the first of these two companion motions:

MOVED that Article VI of the Constitution of the Senate be repealed and replaced by the language contained in the attachment entitled UNIVERSITY SENATE CONSTITUTION.

This being a constitutional amendment, Mr. Kleckner reminded the Senate that precedent protected it from amendment on the floor. Any recommended changes would be referred to the proposing body. Should the amendment receive Senate approval upon its second reading, it would then be subjected to a general ratification process involving open hearings and a mailed referendum. Mr. Chipman reported that the APPC has already scheduled hearings for the afternoons of October 3 and 6 and that his committee invites persons wishing to make formal presentations on one of those dates to inform him of their plans. All members of the University are welcome to participate. Ms. Titus inquired which constitution was to be amended�that of the Senate or of the Graduate School�and wondered whether the document in question had ever been formally approved. She learned from Messrs. Kleckner and Feeman that the University Senate Constitution, duly endorsed by the Board of Trustees, was the object of amendment, thereby superseding the old Graduate Constitution which had never been subjected to such scrutiny. Ms. Gerulaitis asked what persons other than the Dean of Graduate Studies would hold continuing ex officio seats on the Council and was assured that four or five University officers (some of them in non-voting capacities), would assist the Dean in providing such stability.

Attention then turned to the corollary motion:

MOVED that the Senate establish a standing committee called the Graduate Council, the charge and membership of which are specified in the attachment entitled UNIVERSITY SENATE�NEW STANDING COMMITTEE.

Commenting on this motion, Mr. Feeman indicated that the Steering Committee would soon be reviewing the roles and interactions of the University Committee on Undergraduate Instruction (UCUI), the Academic Policy and Planning Committee (APPC);. and the Graduate Council. Some changes in the charge to the Graduate Council might result from that study. The Senate, therefore, should view this motion mainly as a proposal to include a Graduate Council among its standing committees. Votes will be taken on both these substantive motions at the next Senate meeting.

Ms. Boulos, seconded by Mr. Grossman, then offered a procedural motion to provide leadership for the APPC:

MOVED that Professor J. Curtis Chipman replace Professor Joel Russell as Chair of the Academic Policy and Planning Committee.

Mr. Russell retains a seat on that body but yields his chair. The Senate approved Mr. Chipman's appointment with unanimous support.

When no resolutions were offered under the rubric of Good and Welfare, Presiding Officer Kleckner made his own contribution to the good of the order by reminding his fellow-Senators of their opportunity to introduce private resolutions at the appropriate point in any Senate meeting. For the information of the Senate, Mr. Feeman then distributed a document entitled FORMATION OF COMMISSION ON THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CENTER FOR HEALTH SCIENCE; specifying the charge and membership of that newly designated body headed by Mr., Stransky.  He reviewed changes in the Center since the resignation of Director Pak and appointment of Interim Director Russell during the summer months and reported the activities to date of the twenty-seven member Commission (thirteen from Oakland University, fourteen from the medical community). The group held its first meeting early in September, breaking into five subcommittees�one studying each of the five charges to the Commission. Reports are due in March, and the search for a permanent director will follow upon this comprehensive study.

President Champagne then addressed the Senate on a variety of issues, beginning with updates on three topics of current interest. He apprised the group of progress in development efforts, rehearsing background events such as appointment of Mr. Swanson as Vice President for Developmental Affairs, fostering of the President's Club, and self-assessments conducted by CAMP and SUAMP committees and then highlighting recent involvements of the University with the consulting firm of Brakeley, John Price Jones which this summer concluded a feasibility study with the indication that Oakland University is ready to start gearing up for a formal development campaign.  Although the campaign will not begin officially for at least a year, the Board has granted approval for retention of the sane consulting firm to direct the effort, and a full-time person from that firm will soon appear on campus to oversee the operation. The unbroken success record of Brakeley, John Price Jones in conducting development campaigns for such institutions as Boston University and Purdue instills confidence�as does the willingness of that firm to commit itself to Oakland University. The President cautioned, however, that a development campaign elicits long-term funding commitments rather than instant prosperity.

He then announced that, in response to recent reports on American education such as "A Nation at Risk" and the Carnegie Institute report, he is appointing a task-force headed by Dean Pine to consider Oakland University's role in helping public schools improve their performance and in fostering constructive interactions among public school systems, community colleges, and the University. The President went on to indicate that he has been devoting major efforts over the past year to cultivating plans for a research and development technology park to provide economic stimulation for the area immediately surrounding the campus. He feels that the project, modeled on the Forrestal Center at Princeton, is progressing well and that the arrival of Comerica as our neighbor rewards this effort. He pledged to report to the Senate in greater detail at a later meeting. Concluding his presentation with a formal address to the University Senate (attached), President Champagne declared his intention to appoint a Commission on University Excellence that will involve representatives of all University groups with the APPC as its core and Professor Chipman as its chair. He encouraged the Senate, however, to proceed with its normal activities for the duration of this important study into institutional quality. Rather than assessing program offerings as such, this study entails "a thoughtful and deliberate audit of how well we are doing what we say we are doing" in a variety of areas ranging from admissions standards to graduation requirements.

In the question period following this address, Mr. Williamson inquired whether the presidents of Michigan public universities have been discussing admissions issues and learned from President Champagne that the Presidents' Council is placing its emphasis instead on concerns related to the new state commission on higher education. He thought that the parallel group of academic officers might be attending to admissions questions, and Mr. Kleckner offered hope that the issue would soon rise to the surface of that body's agenda. Having completed its own agenda, the Senate adjourned at 4:15 p.m. in response to a call from Ms. Tripp.

Respectfully submitted:
Jane. D. Eberwein
Secretary to the University Senate

ADDRESS OF PRESIDENT JOSEPH E. CHAMPAGNE
to the OAKLAND UNIVERSITY SENATE
September 22, 1983

The years 1982-84 mark the period of the twenty-fifth anniversary of Oakland University. It is a time for celebration and for us to share righteous pride in the accomplishments of this young and vigorous institution. OU's first classes in the late fifties were caught in a chicken coop. In June of this year the North Central Accrediting Association granted our institution mature status which enables us to provide doctoral programs without specific review. Oakland University has made outstanding progress in its first twenty five years.

During the past two years, we have taken it upon ourselves to assess what we are and where we are going. Indeed, while the work of the Committee on Academic Mission and Priorities and the Student and Urban Affairs Mission and Priorities Committee caused considerable debate within the institution, the effort enabled us to offer a more vigorous program tuned to the times in which we live and consistent with the resources at hand. While we have had to cut back on staff, reduce budgets, and eliminate or modify programs, we have done so carefully with the goal of insuring the viability and vibrancy of the institution. Our achievements academically are well known. The teaching, scholarship, and research of our faculty are superb. However, I think that there could be no greater tribute to this institution in this twenty-fifth anniversary period than for it to reassess voluntarily the quality of its efforts.

During the past several months, national reports have been issued which have called into question the quality of American education. While some agree with these reports and others question them, they do offer us the opportunity and occasion to assess issues of quality as they affect Oakland University. It is beneficial for an organization, every now and then, to conduct a quality audit of what it is attempting to accomplish. And so, I am asking that this institution, this year, look at how well it is doing what it is committed to do within its stated purpose. The Committee on Academic Mission and Priorities and the Student and Urban Affairs Mission and Priorities Committees helped to redefine our role and mission. Our focus now will turn to how well we are performing that role and mission. The fact that we, as an institution, are willing to look at ourselves from a quality and excellence standpoint will be viewed by many as a positive step forward during this time when many aspects of American education are being questioned and when, in fact, the future of higher education Ii being examined seriously in this state.

I have absolute confidence that most of what we do, we do well; and, indeed, our reputation as a fine, high-quality institution bears witness to this fact. But;, organizationally, we can never become complacent or apathetic. We must constantly strive for higher quality, greater excellence, with a determination to be the best that circumstances and resources permit. At this time we must address the issue of institutional excellence not only to insure that our students are receiving the best possible education, but also to demonstrate that this institution is self-confident enough to examine itself, make its report public, and strengthen any weaknesses which might be uncovered in the examination.

This excellence auditing process will demonstrate conclusively that Oakland University is indeed worthy of public trust and the support it needs to operate effectively.  With all of the accusations being made about the declining quality of American education and with a state-wide commission in Michigan examining many aspects of higher education, I believe that now is the appropriate time for this institution to move rapidly into a solid position of educational leadership.  In the quest for excellence, Oakland University's willingness to examine the quality of its programs and processes and to take the initiative to make whatever changes may be necessary will demonstrate its institutional maturity and integrity. 

Therefore, I am appointing a Commission on University Excellence.  I shall ask this commission to look at many aspects of university academic life which affect the growth, enrichment and development of our students.  I believe that no higher resolve could be achieved than for this institution to celebrate its twenty-fifth anniversary by undertaking a thorough examination of university quality in order to insure that the standards of excellence we all seek are being attained and can be further enhanced and assured for the next twenty-five years and beyond. 

The charge of this commission, yet to be finalized, will not include a review of our program offerings as such; we have accomplished this review sufficiently in the past two years.  Rather the charge will focus on a thoughtful and deliberate audit of how well we are doing what we say we are doing.  Many issues will be included in the examination ranging from academic advising to grading, from admission standards to graduation requirements, from faculty development to promotion standards, to name but a few areas which must be included on the agenda of the commission. The charge of the commission, while broad-based, will have certain minimum specific ingredients, so that this university can be sure that the various policies and processes that  we have put in place during these past twenty-five years, indeed, have led and will continue to lead to the highest quality programs possible and to sustained excellence in the years ahead.

I shall ask the commission to complete its work substantially by May 1, 1984, at the end of the winter term. The commission shall submit at least a preliminary report to me at that time, and I, along with the Provost and the Academic Deans, shall review the findings, recommendations, and suggestions of the commission during the summer months of 1984. We shall then report back to the senate in the fall of 1984 our reactions to the report and begin the process of implementing those changes which appear necessary and desirable using the appropriate governance process. It is my hope that by the end of the 1985 academic year, we will have substantially put into place what may be needed or set in motion further activities or studies which require extended deliberation. The excellence issues are complex indeed, and we recognize that adequate time will be required for discussion, debate, and implementation.

I shall draw upon the Academic Planning and Policy Committee of the university for the nucleus of the Commission on University Excellence. I am asking the Chair of the Academic Planning and Policy Committee, Professor J. Curtis Chipman, to chair this important Commission. The faculty representatives on the Academic Planning and Policy Committee, along with other faculty members as may be necessary to provide adequate university representation, also will be asked to serve on the commission. There shall be a representative of the student body and a representative of the alumni association on the Commission, as well as other university personnel, to insure that the commission has adequate representation of all aspects of university academic life. The specific membership to the Commission on University Excellence will be named shortly, and the charge of the commission enunciated.

Indeed, I am excited and confident about the appointment of this commission. When I appointed the CAMP and SUAMP committees two years ago to examine what we were doing, it was evident to me that at some future time this institution would have to take the next hard step and examine how well it is doing in its commitment to excellence. Now is the ideal time to demonstrate that the Oakland experience is one in which our students can be justifiably proud.

I know that the work of this commission will be complex, time-consuming, and will demand the commitment and the dedication of its members. Many of the issues that will have to be discussed will be controversial. But I am also confident chat this institution is mature enough to examine itself deeply and thoroughly and profit from the experience even if some of the findings are difficult to accept. I am asking the senate and all members of university life to cooperate fully in this undertaking, for I am sure that all of us will emerge from this process, stronger, more dedicated to our task of education, and more highly esteemed by our students and by the citizens of this state who support us.

During this review period, I am asking the senate to proceed as usual with its activities, lest we fall behind in the resolution of pressing day-to-day activities. Oakland University is an institution which should demand no less than perfection in all it undertakes. I am confident that the establishment of  this Commission on Excellence will be one of this institutions's most significant undertakings.  John W. Gardner in his book entitled Excellence stated in 1962:

". . .anyone concerned with excellence in our society must understand and take into account the social complexities that surround the subject.  Only the fainthearted and the easily confused will be daunted by these complexities.  Tougher-minded Americans will see that a clear view of the complexities opens the way to constructive action.

And constructive action is desperately needed.  the transformations of technology and the intricacies of modern social organization have given us a society more complex and baffling than ever before.  And before us is the prospect of having to guide it through changes more ominous than any we have known.  This will require the wisest possible leadership.  But it will also require competence on the part of individuals at every level of our society."

In addition, Mr. Gardner goes on to say: "But excellence implies more than competence.  It implies a striving for the highest standards in every phase of life.  We need individual excellence it all its forms-- in every kind of creative endeavor, in political life, in education, in industry--in short, universally."

I can think of no project more integral to the mission of an institution of higher education than for it to assess itself in a vigorous and open manner. A high quality academic institution is one which finds its success in excellence�excellence that is maintained by periodic and vigorous self-scrutiny. I believe we are ready to accept this commitment to excellence with enthusiasm, dedication, open-mindedness, and solidarity of purpose. Let us demonstrate to all that the reputation we have earned is one that we deserve and one that will endure long into the future. Together, let us use our twenty-fifth anniversary as a time to renew our purpose and our commitment to excellence!