OAKLAND UNIVERSITY SENATE

Second meeting
October 17, 2002

 Minutes

Members present: Alber, Aubry, Bazaz, Bertocci, D. Berven, K. Berven, Coppin, Downing, Eberly, Eberwein, Etienne, Goldberg, Graves, Grossman, , Haskell, Henke, Hildebrand, Khapoya, Latcha, LeMarbe, Machmut-Jhasi, McNair, Mann, Metzler, Moudgil, Mukherji, Olson, Osthaus, Papazian, Polis, Porter, Rozek, Russell, Schmidt, Schweitzer, Sen, Sethi, Vincent, Wendell, Willoughby
Members absent: Blanks, Clark, Didier, Frick, Gardner, Haddad, Hansen-Smith, Jarski, S. Klemanski, Long, Mabee, Otto, Schott-Baer, Schwartz, Smith, Stamps, Surrey, Zingo

Summary of actions
1. Information items Cooley Law School OU committees, OU Telephone books.
2. Roll call. Approval of minutes (Henke, Downing) Approved.
3. Motion to recommend approval of a revised Nursing Constitution (Vincent, Aubry)  First reading.
4. Motion to recommend approval of a Bachelor of Arts in Studio Art (Downing, Graves) First reading.
5. Motion to revise the name and charge of the Academic Computing Committee (Coppin, Mukherji)  First reading.
6. Motion to revise the university probation and dismissal policy (Schmidt, Downing)  Approved following approval of a motion to waive the second reading (Henke, Willoughby).
7. Motion to amend the method by which the chair of the University Committee on Undergraduate Instruction (UCUI)  is appointed (Eberwein, Olson) First reading.
8. Motion to amend memberships of Senate Standing committees (Mukherji, Aubry) Approved following approval of a motion to waive the second reading (Henke, Willoughby)
9. Procedural motion to appoint a replacement for D. Schmidt to attend Board of Trustees meetings. (Khapoya, Porter) Approved.
10. Procedural motion to appoint an ad hoc committee to develop a university vision statement. (Graves, Downing) Approved.

After calling the meeting to order and welcoming the Senators, Mr. Moudgil reported on two information items.

Information item #1  Cooley Law School Committees:  Two committees have been established to oversee the Cooley Law School initiative.
The Faculty Advisory Committee is charged with: fact finding,  identifying opportunities for mutual benefit, anticipating problems and obstacles and finding solutions. The members of the Faculty Advisory Committee are: Randy Hansen, Vince Khapoya, Jay Meehan, Dale Nesbary, Mohiner Parkash, Ishwar Sethi, Don Mayer (on leave, Fall 02)
The Administrative Advisory Committee is charged with: creating and implementing administrative procedures, identifying space and resources, scheduling,    managing internet access, providing ID cards and internet access. The members of the Administrative Advisory Committee are:  Simon Dover,Richard Fekel, George Preisinger,Claire Rammel, Terrie Rowe, Julie Voelck, Steve Shablin

Information item #2  Telephone Directory :  The telephone directory will be going to the printer next week with delivery expected by the end of the month. Information fields include: Employee Name, Position Title, Department, Office Address, Office Phone Number, OU email, other email.  There will also be a general section and an expanded fax section. The Office of the VP for Academic Affairs will assist the AAUP office, if desired, in creating a web form from which faculty can submit their home addresses and other information, including spouse or significant other name, that can be reproduced into a document, printed and distributed by the AAUP Office.  Mr. Russell asked if the AAUP had been contacted regarding this latter plan and the Provost indicated that Ms. Klemanski would be the one to contact when she returns from her vacation.

Following the roll call, the minutes of the September 17, 2002 meeting were approved (moved Mr. Henke, seconded Mr. Downing).

Nursing Constitution

Consideration of a revision of the School of Nursing Constitution was the first item of new business. Ms. Vincent moved its approval and Ms. Aubry provided the second. Mr. Grossman asked about the change in membership specification for the Nursing CAP. He thought that requiring two untenured faculty be members might prove restrictive should the time arise when there were only tenured faculty. Ms. Vincent explained that the change was made to better represent the faculty as it is now. She indicated it would be wonderful if they ever got to the point of everyone having tenure but indicated it is unlikely in the forseeable  future. Now they have the same people serving on NCAP year after year and this change will allow better representation of the faculty as a whole. Ms. Papazian asked what would happen if an untenured faculty got tenure while serving. Ms. Vincent responded that they would have to relinquish their "untenured" seat and wait until a tenured seat was available. Mr. Russell noted that they would have more flexibility if they stated a minimum of 1 untenured faculty should serve on Ncap. Ms. Vincent indicated she would take it a back to her faculty; also any editorial changes should be sent to her and would be incorporated into the document for its second reading. Mr. Russell asked why the Evaluation Committee was deleted. Ms. Vincent replied that it was to free up time for other service activities, that this committee had always worked closely with the Curriculum Committee and their work was able to be incorporated into the Curriculum Committee's purview. 

Bachelor of Arts in Studio Art
The next item of new business, a motion to recommend approval of a Bachelor of Arts in Studio Art was moved by Mr. Downing, seconded by Mr. Graves. Mr. Downing provided some background information regarding the development of this degree. Some time ago the Meadowbrook Art Gallery was moved organizationally into the College and Art & Art History Department. This move has been very successful thanks to the efforts of Profs. Goody and Eis.  The next logical step was to get back into the business of offering a Studio Art major, a major the university once offered.  He reported that the reviewing bodies have made favorable comments, that it is a strong program and he hoped the Senate will approve it.  Mr. Henke asked about the concerns expressed by the Senate Budget Review Committee.  Ms. Woods responded that the concern about the benefits package has been addressed and that the other concerns about space and equipment don't apply since they will be using existing space and resources.  Ms. Papazian explained that the program was crafted to take advantage of existing facilities and staff and was intended to be offered within the current budget framework, for example, sculpture which requires a lot of space was not included.  Mr. Downing noted that it is hard to estimate the number of students who will enroll in the program but there is interest from students who are completing associates degrees at OCC for a 4 year program.  Mr. Grossman asked if the Senate Committee reports on the program will be available by the next Senate meeting and the Provost indicated he hoped so. 

Academic Computing Committee
The next agenda item was a motion from the Academic Computing Committee to revise their name and charge. (Moved Mr. Coppin, seconded Ms. Mukherji). Mr.  Henke noted that the words "for the" needed also to be crossed out.  He also asked why the change was being made to "academic technology" rather than just "technology", explaining that he felt academic technology was too confining.  Mr. Sethi, a member of the Committee, explained that the committee was defining "academic technology" as matters relating to computers and their applications, that the Committee wanted to exclude things like overhead projectors from their purview.  Mr. Sudol reported that, when asked for the reasoning behind the name change, the response wasn't all that clear. Mr. Russell noted that the adjective specifying academic relates to the university history when there was a distinction between academic and administrative computing.  Ms. Papazian thought the phrase "for instruction and research" was enough to focus the committee on the academic aspects.  Mr. Grossman suggested that the word academic be eliminated in everything except for the title of the committee and to remove the word "the" in the second to the last sentence. Mr. Downing commented that it would be useful to understand how this will relate to other entities such as ITI. With no further discussion, the Provost then directed the Senate's attention to the next item on the agenda.

Academic Standing and Honors-Dismissal policy
The motion printed in the agenda had been revised and copies of the revision were distributed to the Senate. Mr. Schmidt moved, seconded by Mr. Downing

 MOVED that the probation and dismissal policy (page 70, current catalog) be revised as follows:
        [strikeouts indicate deletions, bold type additions]

Students with a cumulative GPA of 2.00 or above or without an established cumulative GPA are considered to be in good academic standing. . Students in good academic standing will be placed on probation at the end of a semester/session when their cumulative GPA is below 2.00. They will be allowed to remain at Oakland University on probationary status for at least one semester/session. At the end of a probationary semester/session, students will be: returned to good academic standing if their cumulative GPA is 2.00 or higher; dismissed from the university continued on probation if their cumulative GPA remains below 2.00, but either (1) they have attempted fewer than 24 credit hours at Oakland University, or (2) their cumulative GPA is at least the minimum GPA according to the chart below, or (3) their semester GPA is 2.00 or higher; if their cumulative GPA is below the minimum required GPA based on the total number of Oakland University and transfer credits earned (see table below); or continued on probation if a. or b. do not apply.  dismissed from the university if their semester GPA is below 2.00, they have attempted 24 or more credit hours at Oakland University, and their cumulative GPA is below the minimum GPA according to the chart below.  For example, if at the end of a probationary semester/session, a student has accumulated 46 credits and has a cumulative GPA of 1.77, that student will be allowed to remain at Oakland University on probation earned 26 credits at Oakland University, transferred 20 credits, has a semester GPA below 2.00, and a cumulative GPA of 1.70, the student will be dismissed from Oakland University.

Transfer Credit Earned	Minimum Required GPA
1-16	1.49
17-32	1.61
33-48	1.73
49-64	1.85
65-80	1.97
81+	2.00

Mr. Schmidt explained the rationale for the change, also noting that it was made in response to concerns expressed by the Michigan auditors. In the new policy, students won't be dismissed until they've had a chance to complete 24 credits. There were no questions or discussion and Mr. Henke then moved to waive the second reading. Following Mr. Willoughby's second, the Senate approved that motion unanimously and then proceeded to approve the main motion, also unanimously.

Motion to change how the UCUI chair is chosen
Ms. Eberwein, seconded by Mr. Olson

MOVED that the Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education be named the permanent chair of the University Committee on Undergraduate Instruction by amending the membership list as follows [strikeouts indicate deletions; bold type additions]

Membership
One faculty member from each organized faculty, appointed to staggered three-year terms by the Senate upon nomination by the Steering Committee, each of whom shall represent UCUI to the Committee on Instruction or equivalent group in her/his academic unit and one of whom shall be chair; the Director of General Studies; two undergraduate students designated by the University Student Congress; the above to be voting members. In addition the following shall serve ex-officio and non-voting the Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education as chair; the Vice President for Student Affairs (or designee); and the Registrar (or designee)

Ms. Eberwein explained that this has no bearing on the current chair and that Shawn Lombardo is doing a fine job. It relates more to the history of the committee which was originally established as a Senate committee, chaired by the then Associate Provost for Undergraduate Instruction. That position was held for many years by Shelley Appleton and when he left he wasn't replaced so the Senate had to present an acting chair in absence of an associate provost.  Eventually they despaired of having this position reinstated and changed to a faculty chair. Now, once again, we have a Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education. The advantages of having the Vice Provost chair this committee include:

a) the parallelism that would result with both the Graduate Council and UCUI being chaired by Vice Provosts;
b) the continuity that would result since the faculty membership changes each year;
c) this would provide a direct tie-in between UCUI and the Catalog;  and
d) the Vice Provost is in a better position to implement UCUI recommendations.

She added that UCUI will be meeting again soon and will be discussing this proposal further. Ms. Papazian asked where the records are kept. Ms. Eberwein replied that they are now kept in several cartons that are transported from chair to chair. Mr. Moudgil liked the idea of the parallelism between the Graduate Council and UCUI. Mr. Russell pointed out that the same parallelism could be accomplished by having both committees chaired by faculty. However, Mr. Grossman reminded everyone that the Graduate Council is part of the Senate Constitution and it would require a constitutional amendment to change the chair.

Changes re Senate Standing Committees
Moving on to the next item, Ms. Mukherji, seconded by Ms. Aubry

MOVED that the following changes be made in the charges and membership of Senate standing committees
    [strikeouts indicate deletions; bold type additions]

1. Academic Standing and Honors Committee.
Charge To review, propose, and implement university policies concerning academic probation, separation dismissal, and readmission; to present to the Senate the Registrar's list of candidates for graduation with any recommendations for deletions or additions to the list; and to review and transmit to the Senate nominees for University Honors.

2. Admissions and Financial Aid Committee
Membership: Delete Director of Admissions and Scholarship, add Director of Admissions

3. Senate Budget Review Committee.
Membership: Delete Vice President for Finance and Administration, or designee

4. University Committee on Assessment
Membership : Delete Vice President for Academic Affairs, or Designee, add Director, Office of Institutional Research and Assessment

Again, there was no discussion and Mr. Henke moved to waive second reading. Mr. Willoughby seconded the motion, the Senate approved the waiving unanimously and then approved the motion, also unanimously.

Senators to attend Board of Trustees meetings
Prof. Darrell Schmidt, previously appointed to attend Board of Trustees meetings and report back to the Senate, has a teaching conflict this term and is unable to attend the meetings, so a motion to appoint Peter Bertocci in his stead for the fall 2002 term was moved by Mr. Khapoya, and seconded by Mr. Porter. Mr. Bertocci's appointment was approved by the Senate. Mr. Russell then asked if the Senator's attending the Board meetings could report back to the Senate on a regular basis.

Vision Statement Committee
The final item of new business was moved by Mr. Graves, seconded by Mr. Downing and approved unanimously

MOVED that John Henke (chair), Jane Eberwein, Frances Jackson, and Joel Russell be appointed to draft a vision statement as discussed in the Senate at its meetings in April, May, and September.

Good and welfare

Ms. Eberwein reported that a resolution passed by the College Assembly expressed reservations about the General Education process and asked the Senate to respond.   She enjoined the Steering Committee to make sure that this is brought to the Senate at the next meeting. Ms. Papazain added that General Education is also on the Assembly agenda and that the general education dialogue will be continuing in the College. The Provost expressed his hope that the process can be moved forward, commenting that we need to have something ready for the next North Central visit.

Mr. Russell had a question about the e-mail message about the telephone books and the possibility of an augmented phone book to be published by the AAUP. He wondered if anyone had talked to the AAUP about this. Mr. Moudgil responded that Ms. Klemanski would be the one to ask when she returns. Mr. Russell also reported that he had not been able to find out anything about the promised south campus trails and asked the Steering Committee to push for information on when these will be completed and available to the campus community. 

With no further good and welfare items, the Provost called for a motion to adjourn, many voices responded and the meeting adjourned at 405 p.m.

Submitted by
Linda L. Hildebrand
Secretary to the University Senate.

11/19/02