COUNCIL OF FACULTY DELEGATES MINUTES 2nd Meeting

COUNCIL OF FACULTY DELEGATES
MINUTES
2nd Meeting

October 2, 1995

Present: Professors C. Chancey, R. Colon, S. Conners, K. Corey, M. Dobberstein, R. Evans, J. Hack, E. Jennings, D. Kark, D. Kirkpatrick, S. Lerner, L. Mura, D. Niedner (Sergeant at Arms), B. Pai, D. Pick, L. Rittenmeyer, W. Robinson, (President), W. Ting, C. Torres-Robles, M. Vermaat, J. Walker, M. Zahraee, Vice Chancellor L. Bryant, Vice Chancellor G. Newsom, Chancellor J. Yackel, M. Dakich (Parliamentarian), J. Wermuth (Secretary),

Absent: Professors C. Sekhar and S. Tickoo, Vice Chancellor Singer, T. Moffitt (Student Government)

I. The meeting was called to order by Professor Robinson.

II. Professor Lerner moved the approval of the minutes of the September 11, 1995, meeting. Professor Zahraee seconded the motion. Professor Rittenmeyer asked that the minutes show she was present. The motion to approve the amended minutes of the September 11, 1995, meeting passed.

III. Professor Hack moved the acceptance of the agenda for the October 2, 1995, meeting. Professor Lerner seconded the motion. The motion to accept the agenda passed.

IV. Chancellor's Report

Chancellor Yackel said that the 50th Anniversary Celebration was well under way. He said that it seems that the deadline has passed to file an appeal to the ruling of the Indiana Court of Appeals on its 171st street decision. Vice Chancellor Newsom noted the upcoming Midwest BANNER Users Conference and the construction of a new driveway from the north parking lot to Wicker, and a drop off driveway from Woodmar to the front of the Anderson building. In response to a question from Professor Kirkpatrick, Vice Chancellor Newsom said there will be no restrictions on right turns after 5:00 p.m.

Professor Hack asked whether there had been movement on the south Lake County classroom facility. Chancellor Yackel said he was optimistic in lining up support from the Lake County General Assembly delegation. He said that if there were no approval by the Commission for Higher Education on October 13, there will be no facility by Fall 1996. In response to Professor Lerner's question, Chancellor Yackel said failure to approve at this point will kill the initiative forever.

V. Special Business of the Day

- Council Document 95-19 University General Education Requirements: A. Basic Skills. Research and Educational Policy Committee. For Discussion.

Professor Kark introduced Council Document 95-19 for Discussion, and said that it had been received from the General Education Task Force by the Research and Educational Policy Committee, which had approved it at its meeting of September 11, 1995. She introduced the members of the General Education Task Force who were present. Professor Robinson asked that the Council grant speaking privileges to the members of the Task Force. Professor Lerner so moved. Professor Chancey seconded the motion. The motion passed.

Professor Robinson reviewed the document and its history and asked for discussion.

Professor Zahraee asked the following:

- Are the credit hours in the document consistent with the credit hours in the philosophy and objectives statements previously approved by the Council?

- How will the required credit hours in the document be distributed in associate degree programs, and 2+2 programs?

- What is the significance of the word "normally" in the footnote?

Professor Chancey replied that a) there are no credit hours listed in the philosophy and objectives statements, b) the document being discussed is specifically directed to baccalaureate programs and the departments will determine how much of the general education requirements will be present in associate programs, and c) the footnote is advisory in nature.

Professors Kirkpatrick and Ting questioned the use of the word "repeated" in Part A, item 1, first bullet. After some discussion, Professor Ting moved to delete the word "repeated" from the document. Professor Corey seconded the motion. The motion failed on voice vote. Discussion continued on substitutions and changes of wording for "repeated." Dean Moore said the Task Force will consider the recommendations offered.

Professor Jennings noted that Purdue University Calumet has two gates through which the document must pass - the Council of Faculty Delegates and the academic departments of the two degree-granting schools. Professor Rittenmeyer expressed concern that, because the criteria are so broad, the academic departments could weaken the quality of the general education endeavor and offerings. Professor Chancey and Dean Moore said the success of the general education endeavor will depend upon the good will of the faculty and the oversight committee established by the Council of Faculty Delegates.

Professor Torres-Robles said her department was concerned that there was no explicit mention of foreign languages in the document.

Professor Sil, upon being granted permission to address the Council, expressed concern about how it would be determined whether transfer students met the Purdue University Calumet general education requirements. He also expressed concern about the majors-based writing intensive courses referred to in Part A, Item 1, second subitem. Dean Moore said the status of transfer students will be determined, as in the past, by the department receiving the student. Dean Moore said that the Department of English and Philosophy will provide assistance in developing the majors-based writing intensive courses. Discussion followed, and included the following: possible certification of faculty to teach majors-based writing intensive courses, the too little or too-great specificity of the "one-third of the course grade" stated in Part A, Item 1, first Criterion, and the difficulty in monitoring the "one-third" part of the criterion.

Professor Dobberstein noted that foreign languages were not explicitly mentioned in the documents. Professor Coffey of the Task Force replied that foreign languages are included implicitly in Section B, Part II, items a or b. It was noted that the Collegiate Knowledge document was not under discussion.

Professor Kirkpatrick said that foreign languages and literatures at the advanced level could be included under both the Writing and Oral Expression items of the Basic Skills document.

Professor Rittenmeyer asked Professor Chancey to speak for the Task Force about the course criteria for problem solving. Professor Chancey said the Task Force chose to give as much flexibility to the academic departments as possible, and said for that reason the second required course need not be a mathematics course. Professor Jennings questioned the need for "written" feedback requirement in Part A, Item 3, second Criterion. Professor Chancey said the providing of written feedback to students is not out of the ordinary, and the statement was included to ensure the student does receive such feedback.

Professor Lerner expressed concern that six credit hours of computer utilization seemed excessive in light of the criteria of Part A, Item 4. Discussion followed and included: the idea that the computer utilization item does not mandate a computer course, the ability to test out of general education requirements, the breadth of the items and criteria, implementation and the development of the oversight committee, and foreign languages not being addressed specifically. Professor Pai said his department was concerned with the total number of credits required in Parts A and B of the General Education Requirements Document. Professor Coffey said that it was possible that a single course would satisfy more than one general education requirement.

Professor Lerner expressed concern that the general education requirements will increase the number of credit required for graduation. Dean Moore said the Task Force had distributed an Impact Statement to the academic department heads, and that no impact of greater than 3 credit hours was reported to the Task Force.

Professor Hack said that if the four items in the document are basic, the criteria out to be equal for the four items; i.e., the problem solving and computer utilization requirements need to be increased.

Professor Robinson reviewed the discussion, and said the comments and suggestions put forward will be reviewed by the Task Force and the Research and Educational Planning Committee.

- Council Document 95-20 University General Education Requirements: B. Collegiate Knowledge. Research and Educational Policy Committee. For Discussion.

Professor Kark introduced Council Document 95-20 for discussion. Professor Robinson reviewed the history and development of the document, and requested approval from the Council that blanket speaking privileges be granted to the members of the General Education Task Force. Professor Lerner so moved. Professor Kark seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote.

Professor Kirkpatrick expressed concern about the word "experimental" in Part B, item 1a., second Criterion. Professor Ting said the Department of Biology thinks that Natural Science and Technology should be separate items. Professor Kirkpatrick said the document does not distinguish between natural and social sciences. Professor Jennings said the criteria listed in Part B, Item 1b would include courses not taught in the technology departments. He asked the item be given a different name and more definition by the Research and Educational Policy Committee. Professor Dobberstein asked that the status of foreign languages be revisited, and did note their possible inclusion under Part B, Item 2a. Dean Moore noted again that a single criterion can be met by more than one course.

By general consensus, Professor Dougherty, Head, Department of Biology, was permitted to address the Council. Professor Dougherty asked that the Natural Science/Technology section be separated more fully. He expressed concern about the dilution of the science and said a six-hour minimum of science should be a requirement. Professor Kirkpatrick concurred with Professor Dougherty's request for a six-hour minimum requirement.

Professor Kirkpatrick expressed opposition to the inclusion of Part B, Item 3 Wellness Issues. Professors Rittenmeyer, Walker, Hack, and Bratt; and Vice Chancellor Bryant spoke in support of the inclusion of Part B, Item 3. Professor Jennings supported the opinion of Professor Kirkpatrick.

Professor Colon expressed concern about the potential for additions to curricula with concomitant delay of graduation and increased cost to students and their families. Professor Robinson asked that the Task Force distribute copy of the Impact Statement documents to the members of the Council.

Professor Kirkpatrick suggested an item on Ethics and Values be substituted for Wellness Issues. Professor Pick asked what relevance wellness had to a core, and what evidence there was that its inclusion had the intended effect. Professor Rittenmeyer noted the inclusion of wellness in the general education requirements at other institutions.

Professor Robinson asked the General Education Task Force to review the content and intent of the suggestions raised and to discuss them with the Research and Educational Policy Committee.

Professor Ting distributed to the members of the Council copy of a statement from the Biology Department supporting the separation of science and technology.

Professor Jennings said the documents discussed have resource allocation implications, and that he would like to see discussion of this matter.

Professor Pick asked that the Task Force address the nature of the oversight committee. Professor Chancey said discussions are just starting and that input will be welcomed by the Task Force.

VI. Unfinished Business

There was no unfinished business.

VII. Reports of Committees

Agenda Committee: Professor Hack said the Committee had met September 18 to prepare the day's agenda, and would meet next October 16.

Faculty Affairs Committee: Professor Zahraee said the Committee will meet next week to discuss the Faculty Satisfaction Survey, and that he had met with the Chancellor to discuss with him the provider of the survey. He said he had been informed there will be a new option in the health plan for 1996; and that a speaker has been engaged for the spring Faculty Development Seminar on March 12.

Nominating Committee: Professor Corey said the committee had no report, and that it will meet directly after the Council meeting adjourns.

Research and Educational Policy Committee: Professor Kark said the committee will review the comments of the Council about the general education documents presented at the day's meeting.

Resources and Planning Committee: Professor Dobberstein said the Committee will meet the week following to review the academic calendar.

Student Affairs Committee: Professor Hack said the committee met Sept 13 and discussed library open hours, its subordinate committee (Athletic Affairs), and its charge as contained in the Bylaws of the Council.

Intercampus Faculty Council: Professor Hack said she has received no notice of a meeting of the Intercampus Faculty Council.

Student Government: There was no report from Student Government.

VIII. Other New Business

There was no Other New Business.

IX. Adjournment

Professor Robinson called for a motion to adjourn. Professor Chancey so moved. Professor Kark seconded the motion. The motion to adjourn passed.