Oakland University Senate
Fourth Meeting
December 11, 1997
Minutes
Members present: Alber, Andrews, Barnett, Blume, Boddy, Connellan, Cronn, Dillon, Doane, Frankie, Gilroy, Goslin, Grossman, Haskell, Hildebrand, Hovanesian, Jarski, Keane, Liboff, Long, Longan, Mabee, McNair, Miller, Mukherji, Otto, Papazian, Patterson, Reynolds, Riley, R. Schwartz, Sen, Simon, Speer, Wood
Members absent: Belanger, Benson, Berger, Bertocci, Blanks, Brieger, Downing, Eberwein, Gardner, Halsted, Herold, Johnson, Landau, Lilliston, Lombard, Mahamwal, Moore, Moudgil, Olson, Polis, Rozek, Rush, H. Schwartz, Sieloff, Sudol, Weng
Summary of actions
1. Approval of the minutes of November 13, 1997 (Ms. Papazian, Mr. Andrews)
2. Motion to recommend approval of a Ph.D. in Education (Mr. Goslin, Mr. Downing3. Steering Committee election
4. Motion to fill vacancy on senate standing committee (Mr. Dillon, Mr. Connellan)
The first item of business after the meeting was called to order was the approval of the November 13th minutes. Ms. Papazian so moved, Mr. Andrews seconded, no corrections or emendations were suggested, and the minutes were approved as distributed.
Dr. Cronn called the Senate’s attention to the final two Senate committee reports that had been distributed with the agenda and asked if there were any questions or comments. Hearing none, she then updated the Senate on some charter school happenings. A recent visit to the five current academies proved reassuring and she reported that the Public School Advisory and Review Committee is currently looking at a number of new applications. One in particular is quite promising. She advised the Senate that additional meetings on January 8th and 15th may be scheduled in order for the Senate to consider the application and to provide its recommendation prior to a January 20th Board of Trustees subcommittee meeting. The School of Business Administration Mission Statement distributed with the agenda was simply an information item. She asked for feedback concerning the new seating arrangement. And also announced that Academic Affairs will receive an additional $250,000 to help with part-time hiring. This will help the Schools and College to open additional sections of high demand courses.
The Steering Committee election was conducted next, on the theory that additional time might be needed by the Elections Committee to handle run-off ballots. Mr. Doane reported on the current membership of the Steering Committee and the eligibility of all senators to run and then opened the floor for nominations. Mr. Andrews responded to Mr. Longan’s query about duties with a brief summary of Steering Committee responsibilities. After due deliberation Ms. Alber was nominated along with several others who declined to serve. Ms. Alber was willing, no further nominations were forthcoming, so Mr. Keane moved that the nominations be closed. Mr. Andrews seconded the motion and the senate approved. With only one nominee, Mr. Doane declared the election complete with Ms. Alber elected to replace Mr. Andrews for the winter 98 term.
Finishing with the new business items, Dr. Cronn then called on Mr. Dillon who moved that the Jack Tsui be elected to the Senate Planning Review Committee to replace Mr. Andrews for the winter 98 term. Mr. Connellan seconded the motion and the Senate approved.
Attention then turned to the one item of old business, the motion to recommend to the President and Board the approval of a Ph.D. in Education with tracks in Counseling, Early Childhood Education and Educational Leadership. Dr. Cronn pointed out that copies of the complete proposal have been made available and that two informational sessions have been held since the last Senate meeting to answer questions and concerns. She noted that the proposal has the support of the Graduate Council and the Senate Planning Review Committee but not the Senate Budget Review Committee which has recommended that consideration of it be postponed. Ms. Papazian opened the discussion with a query about the difference between a Ph.D. and an Ed.D., explaining that she understood that Ed.D. were often associated with Schools of Education and represented a focus on applied rather than traditional research. Mr. Goslin responded that, in general, her impression is correct, that Ph.Ds are generally more research oriented and Ed.Ds more applied. But he also expressed his understanding that there are no clear distinctions between the two in the education community, that both degrees are highly regarded and both are offered at prestigious institutions. The Graduate Council reviewed the proposal and considered the research component and felt comfortable recommending with the program as a Ph.D.
Ms. Papazian expressed her liking for the interdisciplinary nature of the program but wondered about the length of time would be in the program. In reply to her query, Mr. Goslin stated that a university requirement states that students should complete their programs in eight years, but added that some exceptions have been made. She then asked about job opportunities for an education Ph.D. and Mr. Keane responded that there are many individuals in the area who will use this program to improve their promotional opportunities. Ms. Ramey noted that the counseling track graduates will find openings as clinical directors and consultants, in human service agencies and educational institutions.
Mr. Liboff asked why the Senate Budget Review Committee recommended postponement. Dr. Cronn replied that the Committee was concerned about the lack of senior faculty. Mr. Goslin commented that the Graduate Council reviewed and evaluated the program and consulted with relevant faculty. The Council also looked closely at the cv’s of the faculty and did a thorough job of evaluating the qualifications. He stated that, while the cv’s are not ideal, they are nevertheless appropriate for the programs being proposed and that the Graduate Council determined that the faculty numbers and distribution, breadth and depth were adequate. Of the outside reviewers who were asked to review the proposals, eight responded positively and two were neutral. Mr. Goslin noted that efforts towards strengthening research and scholarship in the School has begun beyond the level already deemed as appropriate. Both the Graduate Council and the Dean will be vigilant in keeping an eye on the research and scholarship of the faculty.
In reply to Mr. Longan’s query regarding any negatives associated with instituting this program, Dr. Cronn thought that other universities might be concerned about the competition at the doctoral level. She noted, however, that given OU’s cohort-based approach, we would probably not be competing with other programs in the state, adding that most of the existing programs are not available to part-time students. OU is responding to pressure from prospective students who want to see the program offered here, she stated.
Mr. Liboff, commenting that he has been an occasional critic of schools of education, stated that future of such schools involves delineating the difference between undergraduate programs focusing on certification and graduate programs focusing on research. He opined that the individuals who put this proposal together recognized the importance of research and scholarship and expressed his support for the program. Mr. Longan also wondered how the program will affect the university as a whole; what are the institutional implications and how will this look in ten years after graduates have begun moving into the world. He also asked whether this would affect the accreditation. Dr. Cronn replied that she has heard many complimentary things about Oakland’s graduate programs and assumes that these graduates will also be well received. And that she didn’t think accreditation would be affected at all. Ms. Otto reported that all the SEHS programs meet external accrediting requirements and that the program will benefit the University. She reminded the group that growth of graduate programs is a part of the Strategic Plan. Noting that many of OU’s graduates with Ph.Ds. in reading have won national and international recognition, she added that graduates of the existing master’s programs are among the leaders in the state. She argued that the quality associated with the existing program is a forecast of the proposed new program. Mr. Keane added that the educational leadership program sells itself with word-of-mouth endorsements driving increasing enrollments.
There being no further comment, the question was called, there were no objections and the motion was put to a vote and approved. Dr. Cronn then called for any good and welfare items, and hearing none, the meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m.
Submitted by,
Linda L. Hildebrand
Secretary to the University Senate