Oakland University Senate
Thursday, 10 December 1987
Third Meeting
MINUTES
Senators Present: Abiko, Appleton, Barthel, Bhatt, Burke, Cardimen, Cass, Chapman-Moore, Chipman, Christina, Coffey, Dahlgren, Desmond, Downing, J. Eberwein, R. Eberwein, Eliezer, Gerulaitis, Grossman, Hart-Gonzalez, Hartman, Haskell, Herman, Hildebrand, Hough, Jackson, Karasch, Kleckner, Lindell, Maschke, Miller, Millwood, Murphy, Muir, Olson, Pettengill, Pillow, Pine, Rosen, Schimmelman, Sherman, Stern, Theisen, Tripp, Wedekind, Wilson.
Senators Absent: Braun, Brown, Champagne, Copenhaver, Faber, Fish, Frankie, Higgins, Horwitz, Ketchum, Lauer, Reddy, Riley, Stamps, Stillman, Williamson,
Summary of Actions:
1. Minutes of 12 November 1987 (Stern; Hough). Approved as corrected.
2. Amendment to previously offered amendment regarding late adds (Stern; Christina). Defeated.
3. Amendment to change "20th calendar day" to "13th calendar day" (Stern; Hart-Gonzalez). Defeated.
4. Motion to shorten late-add periods (Rosen; Gerulaitis). Approved
Mr. Kleckner opened the afternoon's festivities at 3:13 p.m. by calling attention to the colorful agenda distributed by his office, using a borrowed copier. He thought the document appropriate to the season. Simultaneous circulation of another document, the minutes of 17 September, responds to a mailing problem that seems to have deprived some Senators of their copies. Everyone has received another copy lest anyone do without. After making that announcement, Mr. Kleckner called for discussion of the 12 November minutes (Moved, Mr. Stern; seconded, Mr. Hough). Mr. Downing, speaking on behalf of the tardy Mr. Tracy, pointed out an error on page 3. Mr. Tracy should have been quoted as saying that the wording of the amendment, rather than the main motion, had not been considered by the APPC and "probably would not have secured its blessing." The remark had been understood in this light by Mr. Stern, and the record will be corrected accordingly. Mr. Olson then congratulated the secretary on the enjoyable quality of Senate minutes, records which Mr. Kleckner noted to be happily anticipated by readers. With no further discussion, the November minutes were approved as corrected.
The only formal business announced on the agenda was a motion from the Academic Policy and Planning Committee to shorten the late-add period, accompanied by an amendment offered by Senators Stern and Hart-Gonzalez. When offered a chance to speak to this amendment, intended to contract the late-add period in fall and winter semesters from the "20th calendar day after the first day of classes" to the "13th calendar day," Mr. Stern asked permission to perfect the amendment by adding a new sentence because he had concluded that the original amendment could not work. Mr. Kleckner suggested that he introduce an amendment to the amendment. Thus encouraged, Mr. Stern (seconded by Mr. Christina) presented the following language to be attached to the original amendment: "in those years when fall classes begin in advance of Labor Day, the last allowable date to add a class shall be the second meeting of Monday classes." When Mr. Grossman pointed out that the Registrar's Office closes before those classes begin, the language was refined to read "the day following the second meeting of Monday classes." When Ms. Gerulaitis inquired whether students would have only one week to make this decision, Mr. Stern replied that he counted nineteen days. He explained that, since debate in November had convinced him that his amendment proved unworkable for Monday night classes when the fall semester begins before Labor Day, be wished to build in safeguards for students in those classes while allowing sufficient days for all class beginnings. Mr. Kleckner suggested discussing the principle rather than specific language. He thought the real question was whether the Senate wished to ensure at least two meetings of every class before the late-add deadline. Mr. Stern concurred.
Mr. Tracy professed himself still troubled by the amendment to the amendment with respect to those students who add In the third class week because they are moving from an accelerated course to one more slowly paced. He noted that these people had not actually missed material and could be expected to make a smooth adjustment. In such cases (as distinct from cases of nomads just dropping by a variety of classrooms while deferring final choice), he judged thirteen days an unreasonable limit. He reported that the APPC had discussed the original Stern amendment, voting unanimously against it, and indicated that it bad especially displeased representatives of the University Congress. His committee saw good academic reason for some late adds. Mr. Downing then informed his colleagues that the matter had also been considered twice by the University Committee on Undergraduate Instruction, whose members considered a three-week late-add period academically sound. They thought that an abrupt reduction from four weeks to two raised serious concerns. This prompted Mr. Burke to wonder what those concerns might be. Mr. Downing referred to Mr. Tracy's example and recurred to the previous month's discussion of Financial Aid practices. Debate concentrated for a while on the matter of late adds caused by fine-tuning of placements within a course continuum. Mr. Stern noted enormous variances among the practices of diverse academic units. His own experiences as instructor of a lower-level Chemistry course into which people slide from an accelerated course contradicts Mr. Tracy's. Students adding his course in the third week would still be in hot water as a result of adding late, even though most could probably catch up when making the transition in the second week. He would prefer not to bar the door to students entering late from another course as he would have to do under terms of the main motion. He asked Mr. Grossman how the proposed change In late-add policy would affect students in Mathematics courses. Mr. Grossman thought most would be able to handle it. Although sympathetic to the concerns raised by her colleagues, Ms. Hart-Gonzalez objected to setting a policy mainly on the basis of switches between more-or-less parallel courses, noting that even in those cases some people must shift upward or outward rather than down.
Mr. Dahlgren then shifted the terms of discussion by raising a salient question: If a three-week late-add period is too long, what have people been doing for the last nine years with a four-week period? Speaking for herself, Ms. Tripp said that she refused to sign add slips; she thought a four-week period unconscionably long but reminded people that the decision rests at any time with the instructor, who is best able to judge a particular case. Mr. Tracy agreed, noting only that there are circumstances where an add in the third week may be reasonable. Moving from four weeks to three impressed him as a step In the right direction; moving abruptly from four to three would be a hasty change. Mr. Christina then pointed out that we no longer have full semesters at Oakland University anyway.
At this point, Ms. Tripp called the question on the amendment to the amendment. A voice vote proving inconclusive, a display of hands indicated that the measure failed by a significant number of votes. The original amendment then came on the floor, but Mr. Stern indicated his own intention to vote against it. It was defeated by voice vote.
Attention reverted to the unamended APPC motion (Mesdames Rosen and Gerulaitis). Mr. Grossman wondered whether the sponsoring committees were more comfortable than Mr. Stern with the lack of symmetry between parts A and B. Speaking for the Steering Committee, Mr. Kleckner reported that the answer was yes. B always allows two meetings before a final decision. Mr. Pettengill elaborated on this reply by pointing out that the Steering Committee chose the specific number of days in each case to guard against the deadline's falling on a Saturday or Sunday. Mr. Tracy admitted that the APPC had given short shrift to the matter of spring and summer sessions but reported the membership comfortable with the motion on the floor. Mr. Stern worried about unfairness to spring/summer students, hoping the language could be revised to achieve parity without allowing excessive time. Ms. Hart-Gonzalez brought up the fact that spring/summer classes meet more frequently than fall/winter ones so that students have more opportunities to participate in fewer weeks. Mr. Kleckner remarked that spring/summer sessions have always been scheduled to avoid Labor Day. When Ms. Rosen called the question, the motion carried with one dissenting vote:
MOVED that Senate legislation of 16 February 1978 establishing a four-week period at the beginning of each semester during which courses way be added (two weeks during spring and summer terms) be repealed and replaced by the following (old language lined out):
A . That during fall and winter semesters the last date for adding a regular course be the end of the fourth week of classes 20th calendar day after the first day of classes,
B. That during spring and summer terms the last date for adding a regular course be the end of the second week of instruction 7th calendar day after the first day of classes,
C. That during fall and winter semesters all dates governing the adding, dropping, and grading of half-semester courses be patterned according to the spring/summer calendar.
Mr. Kleckner thought it reasonable to expect the revised policy to appear in the next catalog for implementation in the fall of 1988.
There was no new business, nor were any private motions introduced for the good of the order. Mr. Kleckner filled the gap in programming with a succession of information items. First among these was a reminder of Library groundbreaking ceremonies scheduled for the following day. Ground would be moved first in small, symbolic quantities--then in large ones. The Science Building project also advances. A list has now been developed of five major Michigan firms interested in designing the project, and an architect-screening committee involving representatives from affected departments will soon pare that list to the top three. Mr. Dahlgren, who serves on that committee, reported that his group would be meeting with all contenders before adopting their short list on January 6. Mr. Kleckner said that the state government would be informed of developments but would not dictate our selection.
Early registration for the Winter turned out to be light, raising financial worries--especially severe ones when coupled with signals from Lansing about possible budget retrenchment. Mr. Beardslee's figures show a trend toward fewer courses elected by the average student. Mr. Kleckner indicated that Oakland University is taking some steps to provide more options for students. A telephone campaign has reached new fall registrants who failed to register early for the winter. About half those persons still plan to register, and others report diverse reasons for leaving. It turns out that community colleges often send postcards reminding students individually about registration dates. Mr. Barthel suggested placing speakers on poles all around campus. Mr. Kleckner reported that the Admissions Office is still actively seeking all qualified FTIACs and graduate students, using late-applying transfers as their swing group. Nonetheless, it proves tricky to keep the system In balance.
The Steering Committee has discussed the emeritus issue in light of developments reported at the November meeting and is now seeking advice from the Faculty Reappointment and Promotion Committee on the collateral issue of appropriate titles for the three worthies who have already retired with emeritus rank. These persons may be designated Distinguished University Professors, emeriti. Once that issue is clarified, the Steering Committee will present a proposal to the Senate for virtually automatic elevation of tenured retirees to emeritus rank.
Mr. Kleckner recurred to the lighting issue raised in November by Senator Tripp. A study is now being made of campus lighting, and the Campus Development and Environment Committee is represented in this 'Work by its chair, Senator Schimmelman. He urged concerned persons to communicate either with Ms. Schimmelman or with Mr. Atkinson in the Provost's Office. Ms. Tripp, reluctant to be identified as "the lady with the lamp." remarked that a missing lightbulb in front of O'Dowd Hall had been creating a hazard for some months.
Mr. Bartalucci then drew the meeting to a close by wishing all a Merry Christmas. He pointed out that the Registrar's Office faces a compressed schedule this year and urged faculty members to meet the published grade-submission deadlines for the sake of their students. He then extended his wishes for a Happy New Year--or at least a cheerful January 4 registration day. Large numbers of students are expected on that occasion. Even though the new on-line system cuts back the demand for faculty involvement in the arena registration process, it remains desirable to have professors available to deal with closed classes in their home units. His office welcomes faculty volunteers. January 4 is expected to be the day of maximum pressure so far on the on-line system, and he hoped that the University community would understand the system's limits. He concluded with a general proclamation of Season's Greetings. Mr. Kleckner responded by explaining that new ways of getting significantly more computing power are now being explored and may be in place for the summer registration period. Much power resides down the street from us, and Oakland will try to tap into it in order to compress the early registration period for the fall to three days or so without kicking other computer users (including Financial Aid officers and academic advisers) off the system.
With business thus concluded, Mr. Kleckner adjourned the meeting at 3:58 p.m. by extending his best wishes for happy holidays.
Respectfully submitted:
Jane D. Eberwein
Secretary to the University Senate