Oakland University Senate
Thursday, 12 March 1987
Sixth Meeting
Rooms 128.0 129, 130 Oakland Center
Minutes
Senators Present: Appleton, Barnard, Bertocci, Bingham, Blankenship, Blatt, Burke, Chipman, Coffey, Dahlgren, Desmond, Downing, J. Eberwein, R. Eberwein, Frankie, Garcia, Gerulaitis, Haskell, Higgins, Hightower, Hildebrand, Hough, Kiwicz, Ketchum, Khapoya, Kleckner, Lindell, Moore, Pillow, Pine, Reddy, Russell., Schimmelman, Srodawa, Stillman, Stinson, Straughen, Swartz, Taylor, Wilson, Witt.
Senators Absent: Barthel, Cardimen, Champagne, Chatterjee, Clatworthy, Copenhaver, Diltz, Hamilton, Hart-Gonzalez, Hartman, Herman, Heubel, Horwitz, Liboff, Pettengill, Righter, Rozek, Terry, Thomas, Tripp, Willoughby.
Summary of Actions:
1. Minutes of 15 January 1987 (Hough; Hildebrand). Approved
2 . Motion to increase credit requirements for the M.A. in Counseling program (Dahlgren; Pine). First reading.
3 . Motion regarding Senate representation of the Eye Research Institute (Wilson; Witt). First reading. 4 . Motion to fill a seat on the Academic Policy and Planning Committee (Bingham; Garcia). Approved.
Mr. Kleckner called the meeting promptly to order at 3:20 and proceeded at once to consideration of the minutes of 15 January. These having been moved by Mr. Hough and seconded by Ms. Hildebrand, were approved without discussion. Those minutes recorded the Senate completion of its previous agenda, leaving the group free to move into the sphere of new business.
The first item thereof was a motion from the Graduate Council (moved, Mr. Dahlgren; seconded, Mr. Pine) to increase requirements in the M.A. in Counseling program:
MOVED that credit requirements for the M.A. in Counseling program be increased from 36 to 48 semester hours.
Calling attention to relevant materials distributed just prior to the start of the meeting, Mr., Kleckner pointed out that this motion emerged as an outgrowth of the graduate program review system and demonstrated how that process works. It also results from the accreditation process in that the body to which the Graduate Council directed the Counseling faculty to turn for accreditation makes specific requirements that necessitate this action. He then turned over the floor to Mr. Dahlgren as spokesman for the Council.
Mr. Dahlgren reported on the Graduate Council's review of this proposal and assured his Senate colleagues that the Council found the case for this proposal to be unusually strong. he deferred to Professor Robert Brown, chair of the Guidance and Counseling Department, for further explanation.
Briefly recounting the history of the graduate program in Counseling, Mr. Brown emphasized the effects of a switch sometime in the early 1970s from school counseling to community counseling as the typical goal for students in such a program. One response nationally to this shift in purpose was the emergence of a new accreditation system known as the Council for the Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Program in the middle of that decade. Since then, many nationally prominent counseling programs have met CACREP accreditation standards. the faculty here, seeing their own program approach that level of excellence, now seek CACREP's approval. They have been encouraged in this effort by the Graduate Council at the time of their program review by that body. They now ask the Senate's approval to put in place the final change needed to meet CACREP requirements. Their hope is to improve the quality of the academic program while extending new opportunities to its graduates.
Mr. Kleckner noted that the 48-hour credit requirement is a minimum CACREP standard before opening the floor to questions. The only actual inquiry came from Mr. Russell, who wondered whether the courses offered for this program are offered every semester and session. Mr. Brown replied that some are and that others are offered on a predictable annual cycle.
Mr. Chipman introduced the views of the Academic Policy and Planning Committee, which reviewed this proposal while it was before the Graduate Council. The APPC approved the requested expansion of credit requirements, finding the proposal good for the program and consistent with the University's mission. No conflict with other programs is perceived. he stressed that the APPC had looked into issues of financing this program and was satisfied that its costs would be borne within the sponsoring school--with reduction of enrollment presumably balancing increased credit demands for each student so as to keep credit delivery steady. Mr. Kleckner, hurrying to escape in time to chair a meeting of the Cranbrook Board, then moved ahead to the next item of the agenda; he states his intention to yield the chair to Mr. Dahlgren, of business proved time-consuming.
The second order of business proved to be a motion from the Steering Committee to provide for Senate representation of faculty in the Eye Research Institute (Moved, Ms. Wilson; Seconded, Mr. Witt):
MOVED that the Senate repeal its legislation of 6 December 1979 linking faculty of the Institute of Biological Sciences with those of the Center for Health Sciences for purposes of Senate voting and representation by establishing separate rights of representation for the Eye Research Institute. The Director of the Eye Research Institute shall be seated ex officio and voting. Faculty holding primary appointments in the Eye Research Institute shall be entitled to minimum representation of one elected seat and such additional seats as may be warranted by.the Senate's apportionment procedures.
Mr. Kleckner indicated that this motion attempts to correct an unintended injustice that resulted from approval of the Constitution for the School of Health Sciences. Since the Senate awards certain privileges to the organized faculties of schools, and since school status now extends those privileges to the Health Sciences faculty, the one remaining "disorganized" faculty group--hitherto joined with Health Sciences folk for governance purposes--has been effectively disenfranchised. Assuming this situation to be distasteful to Senators, the Steering Committee proposes this addition to Senate membership. No discussion followed his explanation. The motion will be eligible for voting at the next meeting of this body.
The third motion to come forward was a proposal from the Steering Committee to name Philip Singer to the Academic Policy and Planning Committee as a replacement for Sharon Bostick during the Winter 1987 semester (Moved, Ms. Bingham; Seconded, Ms. Garcia). This motion passed without debate. The APPC is again complete, and Mr. Chipman notified his colleagues that Mr. Singer will be expected to maintain the minutes of the next meeting.
No good and welfare matters slowed the rapid pace of the meeting. The chair was left, therefore, to present several information items. The first concerned the Ad hoc Committee on Presidential Review. Mr. Kleckner thought that the statement on the agenda was self-explanatory; although he added an expression of regret that ill health had forced Alice Gorlin to resign her position as representative of the School of Business Administration. She has been replaced by Professor Botsas. Mr. Barnard, chair of this new body, reported that the only news is that there is nothing to report.
Mr. Kleckner then announced that the Board of Trustees had acted the day before to name the land planning firm of Johnson, Johnson, and Roy to update the campus master plan. The first concern will be with highways approaching the campus. The Road Commission reported to the Board on 11 March to present a triad of plans for traffic flow approaching the campus. By Plan A, a divided boulevard would speed all Rochester-bound traffic along University Road directly to the main campus entrance, where some cars would enter the university while the vast majority would turn left onto a four-lane Squirrel Road toward Walton. Plan B, a more expensive variant, would make Squirrel Road a divided boulevard from the campus entrance to Walton. Plan C would widen University Road to our front door and do nothing further for Rochester-bound traffic. The Road Commission wants Oakland University to dedicate (give) its land north along Squirrel Road to Walton to allow for necessary widening of the road. Later it hopes for similar generosity in dedicating University-owned land south along Squirrel Road for a much more considerable distance.
~ For the first part of this project, the Road Commission claims that it may already have certain dedicated rights from old MSU Board to a wider right-of-way north along Squirrel. The University will make no hasty decisions in this matter and will direct Johnson, Johnson, and Roy to study alternatives. As the Road Commission has just been hit by a court action that may delay all building this year, some time may be liberated for study. The Supreme Court has agreed to listen to arguments that its jurors should hear the appeal case in June. If they decide not to hear it, highway developments may proceed. in mid-summer as the original lower court decision favored the Road Commission; but, if the Court decides to hear the case, a decision would come later and effectively prevent road-work this year. Eventually, Johnson, Johnson, and Roy will turn attention to the on-campus master plan to update it with projections to the year 2030 or 2040 A.D. in terms of building placement and aesthetic design. This firm is a major land-planning company with considerable experience nationwide in planning university campuses; it is the group that drew up our original 1972 master plan that is now subjected to its first updating.
The Board also approved the University's engagement with EDS to move us ahead in computer operations. This agreement entails the arrival of an EDS person to head our system for a year as Assistant Vice President for Computer and Information Systems. This worthy, yet unnamed, will probably report to the President. He or she will be backed by a team of EDS people who can provide various kinds of help. Mr. Kleckner projected that the first concern of our EDS consultants will be to decide what to do about our evolving Student Records System---whether to continue developing it or to substitute a package. Another concern will be to put packages in place for other kinds of administrative purposes, with the long-term goal of shifting emphasis from administrative to academic computing. (EDS has no packages of its own.) Decisions about new academic hardware will be made as well, and Mr. Kleckner emphasized that options remain open in this area: No decision has yet been made about any piece of hardware. He announced that the Academic Computing Committee (perhaps somewhat augmented) would be involved in this process. When Mr. Ketchum asked what would happen about office automation and networking, Mr. Kleckner said that these matters would be included in EDS studies.
Mr. Barnard then raised a question about the traffic situation likely to result from development of the Park. He predicted that the demand for better roads would be a serious one and wondered whether any reason for confidence existed that the roads would be adequate. Mr. Kleckner pointed out that the Road Commission is working on this matter and thinks that its plans will serve the purpose. Widening of 1-75 begins this summer. Delays in implementing plans, however, suggest that conditions will get worse before improving. He stressed that we need to make sure that University roads do not become short-cuts for drivers without other business on our campus.
On this cautionary note, the chair welcomed Mr. Ketchum's call for adjournment at 3:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jane D. Eberwein
Secretary to the University Senate