Oakland University Senate
Second Meeting
Thursday, 20 October 1994
Minutes
Senators present: Andrews, Ari, Benson, Bertocci, Bhatt, Bricker, Brown, Chipman, Dahlgren, Downing,J. Eberwein, R. Eberwein, Fish, Gerulaitis, Gilroy, Hansen, Hough, Hovanesian, Liboff, Mittelstaedt, Moore, Moran, Moudgil, Muir, Olson, Otto, Packard, Pipan, Reynolds, Rickstad, Rooney, Rozek, Rush, Russi, Schott-Baer, Selahowski, Shepherd, Silk, Stano, Taam, Thomas, Wedekind, Winter
Senators absent: Abiko, Berven, Braunstein, Briggs-Bunting, Buffard-O'Shea, Capps, Christina, Frankie, Garcia, Hildebrand, Hormozi, Khattree, Kheir, Marks, Polis, Reddy, Schmitz, Schwartz, Sevilla, Stevens, Zenas.
Summary of actions:
1. Motion to approve minutes (Gerulaitis, Hough) Approved.
2. Motion to fill Senate Committee vacancies (Hough, Andrews) Approved
3. Motion to endorse the transfer of the Honors College from the College of Arts and Sciences to the Office of the Vice President of Academic Affairs (Chipman, Downing) First reading.
Mr. Russi called the Senate to order at 3:14 and announced that Catherine Rush had graciously volunteered to serve as secretary for this meeting. The minutes of the September 22, 1994 meeting were quickly approved as distributed, following a motion by Ms. Gerulaitis and a second by Mr. Hough.
Information items: Enrollments and Strategic Planning
Enrollments
Beginning on a positive note, Mr. Russi distributed a three-page chart detailing full time enrollment, part time enrollment, and total enrollment for the university and each academic unit going back to 1990. He was pleased to announce a very strong performance this fall in enrollment with a total of 13,165 students at Oakland University. This was an increase over 1993 and even exceeded that of 1992, a year in which OU had excellent enrollment numbers. To see what happened all one needs to do is look at part-time enrollment which is up substantially this year by about 6%. This information is based on credit hours taken; a full time student is characterized as an individual taking 12 or more credit hours. Mr. Russi called attention to the distribution over each of the units shown on the chart and how it provides a feel for the shifts over time. In response to Mr. Liboff's query regarding the distinction between evening and day students, Mr. Russi replied that OU has around 5000 evening students, a number that has remained fairly constant. Mr. McKay asked if the students were classified by program and Mr. Russi answered that the breakdown was by declared majors, so that an individual is counted in Arts and Sciences by saying they have a major in Arts and Sciences.
Strategic Plan
Mr. Russi then turned to Ms. Packard who provided an update on the Strategic Plan. The Board of Trustees discussed the Strategic Plan at a retreat and requested some additions and changes that are reflected in the version now under consideration. This version is currently being reviewed by the Senate Planning Review Committee and the Senate Steering Committee and she anticipates that the Senate will discuss it at their November and December meetings. The Plan would then go to a Committee of the Board of Trustees and finally, in February, to the full Board for approval. In addition she noted, we are going to try to build support for the plan from the external community. To this end we have some breakfasts scheduled in the next couple of weeks with members of the OU Foundation and board members of the Alumni Executive Committee. Further, the deans will be sharing this strategic planning document with their Boards of Visitors and advisors at their upcoming meetings. She is seeking names of key constituents in the academic and larger community that could be invited to participate in discussions about the plan. She requested that, if there is anyone that you know who could be involved in this next stage, please notify Mr. Russi or Mr. Disend or her. There is still an opportunity for changes in the language of the plan and she cautioned the Senate not to get excited over the tactics. When the board approves the strategy, then we will look at tactics and ask each area of the university to develop a plan, a time table and budget information. There will be a second phase which will do with the institution assigning priorities and determining how we are going implement the plan. She said she would be happy to answer any questions on the process or listen to any suggestions concerning the next steps.
New Business
Senate Committee Appointments
With no old business to occupy the Senate Mr. Russi proceeded to new business beginning with Mr. Hough of the Senate Steering Committee. Mr. Hough MOVED that the following persons be confirmed as elected to Senate Committees for the terms specified, Carl Vann to serve on the Academic Conduct Committee (1994-5) and Julian Gendell to serve on the General Education Committee (1994-5) as a replacement for D. Kulkarni. Mr. Andrews seconded the motion which was quickly approved.
Honors College
Mr. Russi then recognized Mr. Chipman who MOVED that the Senate endorse the transfer of the Honors College from the College of Arts and Sciences to the Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs. Mr. Downing seconded the motion. Mr. Chipman clarified that Senate endorsement would cover both the administrative transfer from CAS to Academic Affairs and the implementation outlined in the bullet points on the VPAA recommendations. At this point he reviewed all the documents the senators should have concerning this proposal; the Ad Hoc Committee Report (K. Murphy), SPRC and SERC Recommendations from 1993, the SPRC Oct. 1994 update and the VPAA's recommendations. He commented that the SPRC had been conditionally supportive of the original proposal because of the attractiveness of making the honors academic program available to students across all the schools rather than just limiting the program to Arts and Sciences. The 'conditional, support was based on the absence of some details and the desire for assurance of at least the same level of monies to support the program. The SPRC now feels those concerns have been addressed and he expressed the Committee's support for the proposal.
Mr. McKay took the floor next, explaining that he was representing the Senate Budget Review Committee at this meeting. He reviewed for the Senators the previous history of this proposal; when this motion originally came to the Senate there was a first reading, then at the second reading there was clarification of what was actually being voted on and the motion then had three parts. Mr. Urice moved to table the proposal and no further action was taken. The Senate Budget Review Committee had prepared an analysis at that time which they'd sent to the then Vice President for Academic Affairs, Mr. Horwitz. That document should be part of the Senate record; it has since been forwarded to Mr. Russi and distributed here as part of the documentation. The relevant information is there your consideration. The SERC supported the recommendation to move the Honors College administratively to the office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs but raised some budgetary concerns about the cost of that program. The Committee felt it needed to see some evidence that the program deserved to be supported at the level at which it is now being supported. He expressed the Committee's support for the motion that is on the floor today.
Mr. Andrews asked about the new format and structure; while it is clear that the Director will report to the Vice President for Academic Affairs he wondered who would appoint the Council members and what would the terms of office be? Mr. Russi responded that he would appoint the Council in consultation with the Director and the operation would continued as it is. Mr. B. Murphy added that the Honors College Council consists of four faculty and three students. The students are sophomore -senior level and are elected by the other students in the Honors College. An attempt is made to get faculty representing various disciplines because one of the functions of members is to review proposals for independent projects. In the current proposal for a university-wide Honors College efforts would be made to include representatives from other professional schools. He added that there are a number of other details to be worked out. As to the the report of the Budget Review Committee and the question of whether or not it is worth the expense, the answer is -- IT IS. With regard to the terms faculty serve on the Council, currently they are pretty indefinite, an individual serves as long as he/she wishes. Mr. Murphy commented that I have looked at Don Hildum and Vince Khappoya for a long time. Ideally the Council would have a number of experienced faculty to provide continuity regarding the students' courses and what the general standards for admission are. The Council functions more or less like a department with cohesion and loyalty highly valued.
Mr. Andrews asked whether this would this be another one of the service items for which the Senate Steering Committee would solicit volunteers in March. Mr. Murphy admitted that he had not envisioned that, but it is a possibility. Mr. Andrews then asked what is the role of the Council in the admissions process? Mr. Murphy replied that no change is planned. In reply to Mr. Andrew's query about curricular changes and whether they would they be approved by the University Committee on Undergraduate Instruction, Mr Murphy said probably.
Mr. Andrews then stated that it might be helpful if the endorsement under consideration included a specific statement of what actions will be part of this recommendation. He then proposed clarifying the motion by stating that 1)the director of the Honors College and its Council members will be appointed by the Vice President for Academic Affairs; 2) the Honors College Council will continue to function in terms of admissions and curriculum processes as it currently does; and 3) the responsibility for reviewing proposed curriculum changes in the Honors College will rest with the University Committee on Undergraduate Education. Mr. Russi noted we now have a motion to amend.
Mr. Liboff, referring back to earlier reports, asked Mr. Murphy how many students now come from outside the College and what changes are expected. Mr. Murphy reported that the last self study showed HC students from all CAS departments and from all professional schools except nursing. Students in nursing have special scheduling problems that make it difficult for them to complete the program. He assumes that greater participation of professional schools will increase the numbers of students. Mr. Downing pointed out that the Honors College is an auxiliary program, that a student still retains their major or degree program and there is no interest in changing that; also the funding level for the major or program would not be affected. Ms. Winter asked, if the Honors College is used as a recruiting tool, will there be larger classes as a result of increased enrollments. Mr. Murphy said he definitely hoped not and added that one reason classes had once been very small was due to very low numbers of applicants. He has since made a strong recruitment effort and has succeeded in increasing enrollments. He intends to keep classes to around 20 but this entails more sections and he has to beg, not for money, but for departmental release of faculty. The costs associated with more students would be indirect. Mr. McKay stated that the Budget Review Committee would like to be consulted if there is a plan to expand.
Mr Downing noted that retention as well as admission is a consideration. I f the sole purpose of the Honors College were to provide general education then held be less comfortable about moving it out of CAS but one reason for transferring it to Academic Affairs is to encourage retention so that more students can complete the program. He reiterated that the credits would go to the department and not to some pot in the VPAA's office.
Mr Bricker, noting that he has taught frequently in the Honors College and has enjoyed contributing to the program, then commented that he could support the motion but had several concerns about the future of the Honors College. One, that with the relocation of Honors College it would become easier for the College of Arts and Sciences to fall off in the supply of instructors for HC courses, a fall-off that would not be compensated for by an increase in instructors from the professional schools. Two, that the natural alliance between CAS with general education in all forms might be diminished, although he admitted that it is certainly possible for faculty in the professional schools to design and/or teach general education courses. Three, he also feels concern about the disproportion between the new initiatives envisioned in Kevin Murphy's proposal and the actual monetary infusion detailed in the VPAA,s recommendation. He remarked that without infusion of substantial new money the Honors College could languish in Wilson Hall as much as in Varner.
Mr. McKay stated that, since positions are driven by students, chairs of departments will be more receptive if 20 HC students are counted as 80. Mr. Liboff commented that while he supports the motion he is still bothered. The original idea of an Honors College was as a shining intellectual light to attract students and he doesn't see that this intellectual goal will be met. Mr. Murphy responded that he hopes that this transfer and other initiatives will help us compete more successfully for University exceptional high school students. It is not working effectively in that way yet because of deficient scholarship funds. However, some of the initiatives look toward endowing scholarships which are needed in order for OU to compete with other offers such students receive. Brian Murphy and Kevin Murphy indicated that they sensed great enthusiasm from professional school deans and faculty for teaching in the Honors College. At this point Mr. Andrews asked for unanimous consent to his amendment and Mr. Chipman accepted it as a friendly amendment.
Ms. Muir asked about the recruitment component and Mr. Murphy replied that there isn't any now. His visits to high schools demonstrated no interest without scholarships. He now extends invitations to students regularly admitted to OU and the only way to change it is to be able to say we have honors college scholarships.
Mr. Andrews asked Mr. K. Murphy what alignment of the Honors College Council membership his task force envisaged. He replied two individuals from CAS, one each from the schools, the director and three students. The Council is also charged to consider recruitment and curriculum and he assumes there is a current document with a formal charge to the HC Council. Mr. B. Murphy said he knows of none but Mr. Downing supposed the Senate had originally issued a charge. Mr. Andrews was assured that no changes in the charge are intended. Mr. Downing reminded the Senate that we are not projecting the HC Council as a Senate Committee. This inspired Mr. Chipman to remind everyone that the SPRC and SBRC are obligated to report back to the Senate in reasonable time on the outcome of the changes. There being no further comments at this time, Mr. Russi noted that we now have an amended motion to consider at the next meeting and turned to Committee Reports.
Committee Reports
Campus Development and Environment
Mr. Brieger, reporting on the activities of the Campus Development and Environment Committee, stated that the committee continues to pursue the recycling efforts begun the previous year and were very pleased to see the recycling containers spread around campus. They are also monitoring the issue of the Adams road widening, a concern to members of the subdivision, and are maintaining a liaison with University Parking Committee. The Committee looked at the Meadowbrook farm buildings on the site of the new Science Building and recommended that the creamery be moved to another location on campus, a recommendation that ultimately was not feasible. They asked that as many trees as possible on the site be utilized elsewhere and that has occurred. The concept of creating various student congregation areas was considered and specific recommendation for those types of sites were made. The Committee followed the development of the campus recreational center and will continue to do so as plans for the center progress. They are also involved in campus signage and are pursuing efforts to display university art collections around the campus. Ms. Hansen asked about their involvement in parking and Mr. Brieger replied that they have signed off on it and turned it over to the Parking Committee. Mr. Liboff commented on a need for benches in hallways for students and wondered if they work working on this, adding that he realizes fire laws may be involve. As a related information item, Ms. Packard reported that we will soon be receiving several styles of test seating for classrooms and asked for feedback concerning preferences.
President Packard took the opportunity at this point to respond to the spate of articles about trees on campus. She stated that the rumors that the crabapples in front of the Library are to be cut down are false. The rumors about the trees at the main entry are true but they will be replaced by many more, adding that many of those trees are reported to be in poor health. The re-landscaping of the main entry is in the budget (the money having come from the sale of the Squirrel Road property) . She said she would ask Mr. Bissonnette to see if there's any way to save the old, large oak that gets the most attention. In response to a query whether any thought had been given to landscaping suitable for conducting outdoor classes, Ms. Packard replied that she liked the idea and suggested the Campus Development and Environment Committee consider it. The entrance plan has been approved by the Board and a paper mock-up of one-half of the projected entry sign has been reviewed. Mr. Bardic asked whether any thought had been given to changes in the traffic circle. Ms Packard replied yes, that thought had been given to finding a safe place for cars to pull off so people can look on a campus map and also that traffic flow at the circle is a problem and needs to be looked at.
University Committee on Undergraduate Instruction
Mr. Eberwein, representing the University Committee on Undergraduate Instruction, began by praising and thanking his committee for their contributions over the past year. He said it was a fabulous committee to work on and wishes everyone similarly rewarding experiences. He outlined a number of their accomplishments: 1) participation in the deliberations and evaluation of the proposed merger of Nursing and Health Sciences- -after due consideration the Committee recommended against the merger; 2) delivered the Committee's 'views on the Strategic Plan and especially expressed concern that more acknowledgment of undergraduate instruction be made in the plan; 3) approved the request from the Registrar to include the second major on the transcripts of OU alumni who return here for such degrees; 4) initiated constructive dialogue among advisors, heads of committees on instruction, the Registrar's office and UCUI at a forum at which community college relations and the petitioning process were discussed; 5) examined data pertaining to the petitioning process and advised the VPAA that the General Education Committee is responsible for handling petitions from students regarding general education; 6) advised the VPAA to implement the ethnic diversity requirement and participated in a forum designed to inform faculty colleagues about the requirement; 7) recommended uniform language for what it meant by the terms major, minor and concentrations across campus; 8) recommended a change in OU's current policy barring students from transferring community college credits after earning 62 credits. and replacing it with a new policy allowing students to transfer credits at any point as long as half of all credits earned are from OU. This particular proposal is in the hands Budget Review Committee for a cost analysis. He commented that this proposal was initiated by Virginia Allen in response to community college objections to our current policy. He concluded by stating that UCUI future activities will include monitoring the diversity requirement, initiating undergraduate program reviews in accordance with Senate policy, sponsoring another forum for committees on instruction and the Registrar's Office. One area for the Steering Committee consideration the need for liaison between UCUI, the General Education Committee and the Senate Plaftning Review Committee now that Mr. Appleton is no longer associate provost. He also remarked that he hopes for student membership, specifically students who can serve for a full year because their contributions have been so valuable.
Good & Welfare
Mr. Dahlgren suggested that the Senate to express sympathy to the family of Mrs. Trumble, a benefactor to the university, who died this week.
The motion to adjourn was made at 4:25, with Mr. Russi observing that there were no further questions or business to conduct.
These minutes are based on the excellent notes of Catherine Rush and Jane Eberwein and are respectfully submitted, with sincere thanks to the note takers, by Linda L. Hildebrand, Secretary to the University Senate