Minutes of the meeting of April 8, 2002
Approval of agenda: Nelson/Reddy
Approval of minutes: Reddy/Nelson
CHAIRPERSON'S REPORT: Nancy Boynton
I don't have much to report except that the president is not here, he's at a meeting of the presidents of Albany and he wanted me to let you know that last Friday Mae was named chancellor of Indiana University at South Bend and he will be distributing a memo this week which says congratulations to May on her appointment. I would like to add my congratulations- we'll miss you. We will also request nominations and applications during the next two weeks for (intro-repeat) to begin during the summer and remain in the position until permanent VPAA is named. Also, it will indicate that there will be a national search beginning in September 2002 and we will be working on a search committee and all those good things.
REPORT OF THE VPAA: Mae Reck
Mae Reck: The only thing I have is that I'm asking for Roger Byrne and Paul Schwartz to give everyone an update on the faculty search.
Schwartz: We had four searches on-going the course of the year in Arts and Humanities. Two of them are completely finished- the communication department hired (name???) as an assistant professor of public relations. The theatre department hired Ted (Sharon??) to be assistant professor of theatre with special being voice and music. Media Arts was advertising for a position (???) creation. They have actually ended up making two offers to two different individuals. One is accepted and the other is waiting for an answer. Modern language department was searching for a chair in a professor of Spanish and I just met with them before coming here to try to figure out how I would announce the status of that search and I guess all I'll say is it's not looking very hopeful for satisfactory completion. Are there any questions? (none)
Byrne: I have a longer list. Biology was successful in hiring and a zoologist. And business administration as I reported last time as a success in hiring their assistant professor of finance. Within education there is quite a number of searches and I'll give you a list of those who got hired. There are two searches that are still outstanding. We made offers in both those searches but those offers have been declined and we are now going back to the pool of candidates that may be up to some other sources or to be able to see if we could (???) results to a successful conclusion. (Rea??) Simons has been hired in the psychological foundations area. (Kara Mayer ??) and (Sam Juhold??) have been hired in the reading area. (Kathleen Grayga??) has been hired in special ed early childhood area and (Kathleen Majaret?) has been hired in the special education area. I would like to congratulate the school of education for all their work and all their great research- its been a successful conclusion. In psychology we've again, had a difficult time in landing a clinical psychologist position. That search has been declared a failed search and we hope that you'll do it again in a coming year. Within sociology and criminal justice faculty member Dave Thomas- not Wendy's but the Dave Thomas that has been hired- and in social work (Robyn Hartinger) has accepted the position in the social work area. In speech pathology, we are again fortunate to be successful in hiring (Miss. Wysenberg). Any questions?
Reck: About Dean Search-There were five candidates that came to interview, I think everybody is aware of that. And an offer was made to one of the candidates and then at that time after extending the deadline a couple of times he took another position in Philadelphia. It's the pharmaceutical school, I can't think of the name exactly, but the University is a pharmacy school. Then after that I found out more about the offer at South Bend and the president and I decided to call in (???) so that search now has been closed because it's the feeling from the president and myself it would give an opportunity for the new vice president to have input in selection for the dean. So a new dean will be selected but at this time this has not yet been completed. Any questions?
REPORT OF UNIVERSITY FACULTY SENATOR: Melinda Karnes
Melinda Karnes: In your packet that you received, you have a form from the University faculty senate or nominations to standing committees. At our last exec board meeting we decided it would be nice if somebody from Fredonia was on a state wide standing committee of the faculty senate. So I would like to encourage you to think about a position. The committees are listed with a little brief overview of each one of the following page after the form. I'll be happy to serve as clearing house or whatever you need me to do to help you with this process. I'd be happy to write a letter of recommendation for you to accompany your application if either of you would like to serve on a state- wide committee. I'll be happy to help in any way I can. I'm probably going to apply for one of them. They try to make nice balance on the statewide committees serving SUNY senators and senators from the different campus senates so they try to spread it out; they try to have a nice balance and each standing committee from each of the different constituencies within the senate. If any of you are so inclined and would be interested in serving on a state-wide committee, the president said he'll pick up the money for your travel so it's nothing that comes out of your own pocket- don't worry about that- you'll be reimbursed for your expenses. I'd like to encourage you to think about it. The applications are due April 30th. Like I said, I'd be happy to facilitate the process so if any of you are interested. I'll be at Alfred at the SUNY senate meeting this Thursday, Friday, and Saturday and then I'll be back. So if you're interested just let me know and I'll be happy to work with you on your application.
Man: Has this been distributed to the rest of the faculty as well? Or will it be?
Karnes: I'm trying to figure out a way to do that because I just got a hard copy. Scan it in and send it out as an attachment or something like that maybe.
Boynton: I can send things to the voting faculty on that e-mail list.
Karnes: I'll write up a short cover letter then and we can send it in. Any questions? (none)
Boynton: That brings us to the standing committee reports. Sara Hamilton is going to be here, but she's not here yet. She had time conflicts the way we all do, especially this week. We did include some items past the academic affairs committee often times does a number of things that we don't actually go over here but for your information, minutes from the academic affairs committee meetings. And one thing I did want to point out to you, on the second page I think of their minutes so it's actually the last page of your packet. At the top of the last page the minor that was names Native American Studies- that name has been changed to American Indian Studies. Elizabeth would be happy to answer any questions if anyone has them about that change or not but we wanted to let you know. Any questions? (none). Ok, Jim, the next thing up is the school of business. I did get it in and I think everyone got packets on the school of business. If they're missing a packet they should get in touch with you or with me?
Hurtgen: That would be fine, or with Kristine. Is there anyone here who did not receive the report? Everyone has received their copy? It came to you perhaps on Friday so I know you have not had a lot of time to review it.
Boynton: Our plan here today is that we have a first reading of this. We have a report out from the academic affairs committee but we won't be doing any voting of this until next month. We want to give you a chance to digest things but also a chance to go over any questions. I know we've been talking about it all year, yet you have a lot more information in front of you now about this. The academic affairs committee did recommend the approval of the bulleted points on the first page, on the cover page. They also recommended that the master plan needs further discussion- some of the details involved in the document, they weren't sure about. But all of the items on the first page they were recommending. Do you want to add anything?
Hurtgen: well, two points. The vote that was taken among the seventeen eligible faculties- these are the faculties in accounting, MIS business, and economics, was twelve in favour, no votes against and one extension. The breakdown by faculty was three votes among the accounting, MIS in favour, five among the business faculty in favour and four votes among the economists in favour. As I said, twelve, zero, one with four non-votes. I also want to publicly acknowledge the hard work of the members of the committee. They are Bill Foeller, Arlene (Hibschweiler, Frank Krohn, Lori Buonnano and Steve (Warner?). Finally, I know that Lori is here so together we'd be delighted to answer questions on any of the material if we can. Perhaps more of that can happen in May if that's the plan of the faculty senate. Here you have maybe some opportunity to look it over, if I can answer your questions...
Schwabe: I've got a question if there is a clarification that you can add. When academic affairs committee reviewed this last week in the meeting and then discussed it afterwards. Basically there are sort-of two components to this. There's the bulleted items with the budget that go together. Then there is the master plan that's sort-of a little bit separate, you might want to address that.
Hurtgen: Well, the bulleted items are merely meant to be highlights for the sake of convenience. The report itself has a number of parts, one of which is the master plan. I was not present for the discussion and the committee and whatever details we've had of the master plan so I cannot comment on that...
Schwabe: But was the master plan, sir, like a best case, longer term, you're not in a sense really asking this body to endorse that or to do what with that?
Hurtgen: It represents, in particular, the master plan represents a vision for what the committee wished to see happen over a period of time. It's obviously based on a number of contingencies. One among them is enrollment and that will drive a financial consideration. It wasn't anyone's expectation that every detail got planned would be met within a year or two or perhaps three. We felt it was important, and the president urged us in September, to think large.
Boynton: Are there other questions? (none) The next item is the program deletion motions. You have those in your packet, sort-of in the middle. We thought that there are six programs that the president and May have recommended be deleted. This was sent to the academic affairs committee. They discussed this and they actually have motions on all of them now. However, when you put things together they had motions on the first four and had not yet come up with the motions for the last two. Because you haven't had information about those, we shouldn't vote on those this week or this month but we can let you know what their recommendations are. Those were the music theory, which the committee is recommending deletion and math physics which the committee is recommending keeping the program. I think we should do this one program at a time and take separate votes on each one and put it in a form of separate motions. We can start maybe with the geochemistry program. Do you have any other information from the committee? I think you have included most of what you have looked at. Any questions?
Man: Have we've got the same sheet that you're talking about?
Boynton: It says "motions to the senate for the April 8th meeting for Academic Affairs Committee". And the first motion it says to retain the geochemistry program.
Man: You mentioned music you said something different (???)
Boynton: What I said was that there's two other programs and those two programs they have not made a motion about when we put the packets together to come out for this meeting. In the meantime they have completed their deliberations on those so it's letting you know. Now the ones that we're intending to vote on today are the four that are in your packet. Jack Berkley is also here today if you'd like to ask him questions and may I assume you may also respond to any questions.
Sara Hamilton: Just a little bit of history here is that these six programs and options were identified I would say, more than two years ago. And through the (???) of these programs we were to work with department chairs in terms of putting those programs on notice that they already were on notice and that they would eventually come forward in some form or fashion in improvement in terms of enrollment. We're encouraged to have a two year ( plan for improvement so that did happen. Second of all, the recommendation also is based on that with regard with working with the SUNY administration programs. We need to be good caretakers of our programs. Programs that are not conducted in many years does not look good to an institution especially when you continue to ask for new programs.
Boynton: So are there any questions on the geochemistry motion? Ready to vote? So the motion as its written is to retain the geochemistry program. All in favour say I.
All: aye Opposed-none
The second program, and I probably should have added this in the beginning. Keep in mind what we do is advisories to the president so because we vote something doesn't necessarily mean its going to happen that way. The second motion there is to retain the industrial management program. Mike Grady is here also if there are any question on This action. Any questions?
Jason Miller: How do you market it? I've never even heard of this program before.
Grady: Well, that's one of the reasons why I think we should retain it is because they're going to have a school of business. We think that we can market this program a lot more effectively as an option through the school of business advertising. If we can just get them to mention that we also have this Industrial Management program which we may change the name to technical management to make it a bit more appealing and less rustbelt sounding. They're basically going to take a look at the whole program and see if we can make it look a little more attractive. There are no other similar programs in SUNY but there is one in Clarkson University that is called Engineering and Management and they have over 200 students in the program so it isn't considered a (sleeper??) program. It does have potential it just hasn't gone on here yet. I think it's worth keeping because it doesn't require any resources and there are no special courses with this program. Students fill up seats in various places around the campus in courses that are already offered.
Man: What does it cost since there is no course cost? Are there any costs associated with the program beyond this (???).
Grady: We have a brochure, the brochure and basically that's it.
Joe Chillberg: I'm kind of curious with the enrollment, if there is anybody here who is involved with the enrollment management committee, what's the prospects of marketing this possible sleeping giant?
Woman: I would say that they're given the possibility to use it, all of its programs and we are looking at specific programs.
Man: What's it really explain to us that way. I'd have to say that we were told two years ago that might be deleted and then they decided not to because the (???) that I remember. And then this year we were told it might be deleted again. There was no increase in students until... or it will be deleted definitely next year. That's not the best (???)
Woman: I know. I apologize for that.
Man: I think one year to revitalize a program is not very long to get it going again. Maybe four or five years (of notice?).
Woman: Any other questions, comments?
Telly: Just one comment. We have talked about, in the business department very much, if at all, and I know that my colleagues and I would really like to have this kind of program so if we can get together with you guys and talk about it, especially if we have a new program of business. I don't see any reason why we can't. The best time to do it is when we're advising students to see if they're interested in this particular program. We haven't done very much and we probably could.
Man: Another possible venue for studies with the program being used, the departments have been going through next year and this year and so on.
Boynton: Are we ready to vote? This is the motion to retain the Industrial Management program. All in favour say I. aye All opposed? none . Ok, the aye's have it. The third motion is on the co-op agriculture motion. That's also been run through the Physics department and Mike Grady is involved with that. That's a motion to delete the co-op agriculture program.
Man: I'm puzzled for the programs that there are motions to keep, we have information about the cost of the program, we have information about majors etcetera. This is the only one of those programs so far that actually has students that actually has majors. Is this an expensive program to maintain? Why are we recommending that we delete it?
Man: Actually, this one has zero current majors as far as agriculture goes.
Man and woman: There are four admitted.
Man: That's admitted, they haven't said they're coming.
Woman: If you look at the other figures, we admitted a lot of people and they didn't end up coming.
Man: I see the fourth, three, zero. The zero means that that's a paid deposits. Deposits mean the students actually came. That's the disappointing part of this program. We get admissions for that deposit, or we get people coming without completing the program. No one's completed the program in recent memory.
Woman: It's a little bit strange in this program, isn't it? Because you don't actually have graduates.
Man: No, it's like the coop engineering program. You're transferring to Cornell University after three years.
Man: Within that program some people end up (???)
Man: That's right. It does have the advantage that it draws a few people here that end up in the biology department.
Man: Does it have a cost associated with it?
Man: Well, not a program. Not a cost involved with teaching courses but there is a fair amount of time involved in replying to all the inquiries. There are quite a few inquiries about the program and very few hits. So if you consider my time and time in dealing with inquires, then that is a cost.
Man: Is that different from the other programs that we are recommending that we keep? In that which, are there inquiries for those programs that people are spending time and money too?
Man: There are inquires but it's much better on this.
Woman: We have one deposited student. Is that right? I'm reading this right in Industrial Management, had one deposit.
Man: There have been five graduates in the last five years in Industrial Management. (???) deposits in the last three years. Some students switch into that program while they're here.
Woman: Any other question, comments? Are we ready to vote on that? This is a motion to delete the co-op agriculture program.
Jan: What happens to the students who have been admitted so far? Do you just say "sorry, the program has been deactivated"? I'm sure they would be notified but what would you do with them?
Man: Actually, I was under the impressions since they were already admitted that they would be allowed to continue.
Woman: They haven't made deposit sheets.
Man: If they do comment, it's a good question.
Woman: We would (???) if there were students in a program that we were deleting (???)
Woman: Are you saying we would let the students graduate but we wouldn't allow new students to...
Woman: You'd have to not accept the deposits anymore, first of all.
Woman: And students who are presently here in those programs would be...are we ready to vote on this one? So this is a motion to delete the co-op agriculture program. All in favour say aye Opposed (3) So the aye's have it. The fourth motion is a motion to delete the undergraduate music history program. I think if we have questions that Sara can answer any questions about that one. Are there any questions?
Woman: Could you just explain what point number three means (on this side??).
Hamilton: General education for music ed have to take a certain amount of history courses and given current resources that's what they can cover. I did talk at length with the head of music history, and while he would love to have this kind of a program, he feels that given our current resources and the focus of the music program that it's unrealistic.
Woman: When you say limited resources, does that mean the faculty?
Woman: Right. We only have one music history professor and he can't do everything.
Woman: What would happen if the senate recommended not to delete it and encouraged kids to consider it.
Hamilton: Well, it hasn't exactly been publicized in the school of music for a long time, which kind of explains the lack of majors. It's not on our informational sheet. I can't tell you why that is because that's been going on long enough. Perhaps even for the last ten years. I think people thought it was already gone actually and they were kind of surprised and apparently when one of our community members looked into admissions in the current figures it wasn't even listed so I think people have thought it was already gone. I'm not saying we wouldn't be interested in having it, but it would be a big focus shift to even recognize that we have it in the first place. There is enrollment possibilities but I think with our current course structure, they would feel uncomfortable offering it. They don't feel we have enough offerings to sustain it, to make it competitive in any way.
Woman: Any other questions?
Man: Just a quick observation, my experience on campus has been that in order to have a major program, you have to have at least three full time faculty members, if not four. With one currently doing the job, we're not talking about just adding a half time person or something along those lines in order to have what we refer to as a viable program. We need some substantial (???) resources or that kind of thing.
Woman: We do have part time faculty teaching some of the courses but in terms of a dedicated faculty member we only have one right now.
Woman: Any other questions or comments? (none). This is a motion to delete the undergraduate history program. All in favour say aye. (Aye). Opposed? (none). Ok. The last thing here came out not quite accurately. It came out as the new American studies major. It's not a new major. We've had American studies major; it's a revision. A somewhat major revision of the American Studies major. We have two new people: Claudia Sadawski-Smith and Christina Jarvis who have taken over coordinating this program so they've gone through a revision and this was sent to the academic affairs committee who are recommending approval of it and Claudia couldn't be here, Christina just gave birth. Bruce will be happy to answer and questions. Do you have something that you want to point out here about this? He's been involved in this.
Bruce Simon: Just one quick detail. You said the major used to be 54 hours so we reduced it to 39 to make it look more attractive to students. So if you have any question I'll be happy to answer those.
Neil Feit: In requirement three it says, the last item. No more than nine credit hours can be taken at the 200 level. Does that mean the 200 level and below?
Simon: I do think it means that.
Neil: Might it be preferable to say 15 credit hours must be taken at 300 or above? If a student wants to take more of these courses then she can take them, but they wouldn't count towards the major.
Man: I like that change. I'm not really in a position to authorize it.
Woman: Actually, I think that he could make a motion to recommend that.
Man: Motion to say at least 15 credit hours must be taken at 300 or above. (Second).
Woman: Any discussion pertaining to that? Ok, now we'll vote on the amendment there. All in favour of changing that to at least 15 hours...
Man: Just say 15-24 since its specified (???) just relate to that paragraph (???)
Man: Does that suggest (???) additionally...
Man: No because he said that students may take more courses than 24 so I think its better the way it was originally phrased. At least a minimum of 15 credits must be 300 or above.
Man: I'd like to get rid of the additional... I withdraw the motion.
Man: Is it in the spirit of your (???) that (???)
Man: Absolutely.
Man: It's in agreeance. He agreed to the change of his amendment. Any other questions?
Man: Now you have to read us the original with the changes.
Joe Chilberg: We vote on the change I believe, and then we vote on the...
Man: yes, that's correct.
Boynton: So the courses come from these two (disciplines?) and no more than 12 credit hours can be taken from any one department. At least 15 credit hours must be at the 300 level or above. All in favour say aye. aye Opposed? (none). Ok, the aye's have it.
Reddy: I have some concerns about the process by means with which these changes were made. I don't know what the process was and I'd be interested in hearing about it if anybody knows. But by the same token I try to avoid being a sociologist as much as possible. However, in looking at least in these circumstances, and not when I'm doing my work within my apartment, when I take a look at the listings of courses here there is virtually no sociology listed. In all fairness one of the things that sociologists do is look in American society and have ideas. In fact, there is more a listing of anthropology here. I have nothing against anthropology, I happen to like anthropologists, but there is virtually no sociology here. For example, under the nine hours of exploratory courses, introduction to sociology is not listed. The focus of that course is primarily on American society. At least America as understood as the United States. Now I understand that America has a broader definition than that but that is at least a part of the story. When you take a look at American cultures, I counted very quickly that there's (60??) that's A and the concentrations. I think there's 65 courses listed there. Very strong representation over any number of departments. Two from sociology. It strikes me that this process has been a mistake. One at least that has omitted giving fair attention to a department that offers a very substantial number of relative courses.
Simon: I want to address the point about the process in two parts. First, the old majors (do not include?) sociology so since George started this, however many decades ago, sociology is not a basis (???). Secondly about processes is that since (Christina Protier??) came here, they have been meeting, spending numerable hours meeting with people, e-mailing people with what (???) committee and they've done a lot for, I can't imagine them doing more to seek input. I'm glad to hear this. I'm glad to hear that the sociology department wants to be more involved in this.
Reddy: I'm not saying that, I'm just asking a question. It may well be, but I'm not certain that it had the opportunity.
Man: Well, I (?) the question because I did not get between the two of them, between all of (???)
Woman: I was at at least one meeting in which all departments are invited to submit courses for this program and urged to submit courses for the program for the advisory committee to consider. I'm not sure why sociology didn't sit in the discussions but they were invited.
Man: There is a big change here in the structure of the program. If that's so, our passage of (???) would not preclude sociology, 72 (years?) some additional courses which they may like to all be included.
Kraus: I absolutely imagine this list is expandable or contractible as needed. What we did do though is change part two. It used to be 12 hours required in exploratory and preparatory courses. It's now designed again with the (gold stream lining??). I can't imagine not being happy to hear expansions to any of these lists. Plus there is a self-defined option that they can choose if people want to.
Woman: Other questions, comments?
Man: Just a clarification that what we are approving is the structure, which we expect will be flexible over time.
Man: I think that's a fair paraphrase.
Woman: I think it has to be because courses come and go.
Man: point of information. Would such additions or deletions require a review or approval of the academic affairs committee?
Boynton: Although that would become a more minor change that wouldn't be brought to this body. All in favour of approving the new revisions of the American Studies major say aye. (aye). Opposed (none). Ok, the aye's have it. That brings us to new business. Do we have any new business? Thank you Sara. I was afraid we were going to bring you all the way over here and not ask you any questions.
Motion to adjourn: Kraus, seconded by Jason Miller-all vote aye.
Meeting adjourned 5:02 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Ray Rushboldt - College Senate Secretary.
College Senate
Minutes of the meeting of April 8, 2002
Approval of agenda: Nelson/Reddy
Approval of minutes: Reddy/Nelson
CHAIRPERSON'S REPORT: Nancy Boynton
I don't have much to report except that the president is not here, he's at a meeting of the presidents of Albany and he wanted me to let you know that last Friday Mae was named chancellor of Indiana University at South Bend and he will be distributing a memo this week which says congratulations to May on her appointment. I would like to add my congratulations- we'll miss you. We will also request nominations and applications during the next two weeks for (intro-repeat) to begin during the summer and remain in the position until permanent VPAA is named. Also, it will indicate that there will be a national search beginning in September 2002 and we will be working on a search committee and all those good things.
REPORT OF THE VPAA: Mae Reck
Mae Reck: The only thing I have is that I'm asking for Roger Byrne and Paul Schwartz to give everyone an update on the faculty search.
Schwartz: We had four searches on-going the course of the year in Arts and Humanities. Two of them are completely finished- the communication department hired (name???) as an assistant professor of public relations. The theatre department hired Ted (Sharon??) to be assistant professor of theatre with special being voice and music. Media Arts was advertising for a position (???) creation. They have actually ended up making two offers to two different individuals. One is accepted and the other is waiting for an answer. Modern language department was searching for a chair in a professor of Spanish and I just met with them before coming here to try to figure out how I would announce the status of that search and I guess all I'll say is it's not looking very hopeful for satisfactory completion. Are there any questions? (none)
Byrne: I have a longer list. Biology was successful in hiring and a zoologist. And business administration as I reported last time as a success in hiring their assistant professor of finance. Within education there is quite a number of searches and I'll give you a list of those who got hired. There are two searches that are still outstanding. We made offers in both those searches but those offers have been declined and we are now going back to the pool of candidates that may be up to some other sources or to be able to see if we could (???) results to a successful conclusion. (Rea??) Simons has been hired in the psychological foundations area. (Kara Mayer ??) and (Sam Juhold??) have been hired in the reading area. (Kathleen Grayga??) has been hired in special ed early childhood area and (Kathleen Majaret?) has been hired in the special education area. I would like to congratulate the school of education for all their work and all their great research- its been a successful conclusion. In psychology we've again, had a difficult time in landing a clinical psychologist position. That search has been declared a failed search and we hope that you'll do it again in a coming year. Within sociology and criminal justice faculty member Dave Thomas- not Wendy's but the Dave Thomas that has been hired- and in social work (Robyn Hartinger) has accepted the position in the social work area. In speech pathology, we are again fortunate to be successful in hiring (Miss. Wysenberg). Any questions?
Reck: About Dean Search-There were five candidates that came to interview, I think everybody is aware of that. And an offer was made to one of the candidates and then at that time after extending the deadline a couple of times he took another position in Philadelphia. It's the pharmaceutical school, I can't think of the name exactly, but the University is a pharmacy school. Then after that I found out more about the offer at South Bend and the president and I decided to call in (???) so that search now has been closed because it's the feeling from the president and myself it would give an opportunity for the new vice president to have input in selection for the dean. So a new dean will be selected but at this time this has not yet been completed. Any questions?
REPORT OF UNIVERSITY FACULTY SENATOR: Melinda Karnes
Melinda Karnes: In your packet that you received, you have a form from the University faculty senate or nominations to standing committees. At our last exec board meeting we decided it would be nice if somebody from Fredonia was on a state wide standing committee of the faculty senate. So I would like to encourage you to think about a position. The committees are listed with a little brief overview of each one of the following page after the form. I'll be happy to serve as clearing house or whatever you need me to do to help you with this process. I'd be happy to write a letter of recommendation for you to accompany your application if either of you would like to serve on a state- wide committee. I'll be happy to help in any way I can. I'm probably going to apply for one of them. They try to make nice balance on the statewide committees serving SUNY senators and senators from the different campus senates so they try to spread it out; they try to have a nice balance and each standing committee from each of the different constituencies within the senate. If any of you are so inclined and would be interested in serving on a state-wide committee, the president said he'll pick up the money for your travel so it's nothing that comes out of your own pocket- don't worry about that- you'll be reimbursed for your expenses. I'd like to encourage you to think about it. The applications are due April 30th. Like I said, I'd be happy to facilitate the process so if any of you are interested. I'll be at Alfred at the SUNY senate meeting this Thursday, Friday, and Saturday and then I'll be back. So if you're interested just let me know and I'll be happy to work with you on your application.
Man: Has this been distributed to the rest of the faculty as well? Or will it be?
Karnes: I'm trying to figure out a way to do that because I just got a hard copy. Scan it in and send it out as an attachment or something like that maybe.
Boynton: I can send things to the voting faculty on that e-mail list.
Karnes: I'll write up a short cover letter then and we can send it in. Any questions? (none)
Boynton: That brings us to the standing committee reports. Sara Hamilton is going to be here, but she's not here yet. She had time conflicts the way we all do, especially this week. We did include some items past the academic affairs committee often times does a number of things that we don't actually go over here but for your information, minutes from the academic affairs committee meetings. And one thing I did want to point out to you, on the second page I think of their minutes so it's actually the last page of your packet. At the top of the last page the minor that was names Native American Studies- that name has been changed to American Indian Studies. Elizabeth would be happy to answer any questions if anyone has them about that change or not but we wanted to let you know. Any questions? (none). Ok, Jim, the next thing up is the school of business. I did get it in and I think everyone got packets on the school of business. If they're missing a packet they should get in touch with you or with me?
Hurtgen: That would be fine, or with Kristine. Is there anyone here who did not receive the report? Everyone has received their copy? It came to you perhaps on Friday so I know you have not had a lot of time to review it.
Boynton: Our plan here today is that we have a first reading of this. We have a report out from the academic affairs committee but we won't be doing any voting of this until next month. We want to give you a chance to digest things but also a chance to go over any questions. I know we've been talking about it all year, yet you have a lot more information in front of you now about this. The academic affairs committee did recommend the approval of the bulleted points on the first page, on the cover page. They also recommended that the master plan needs further discussion- some of the details involved in the document, they weren't sure about. But all of the items on the first page they were recommending. Do you want to add anything?
Hurtgen: well, two points. The vote that was taken among the seventeen eligible faculties- these are the faculties in accounting, MIS business, and economics, was twelve in favour, no votes against and one extension. The breakdown by faculty was three votes among the accounting, MIS in favour, five among the business faculty in favour and four votes among the economists in favour. As I said, twelve, zero, one with four non-votes. I also want to publicly acknowledge the hard work of the members of the committee. They are Bill Foeller, Arlene (Hibschweiler, Frank Krohn, Lori Buonnano and Steve (Warner?). Finally, I know that Lori is here so together we'd be delighted to answer questions on any of the material if we can. Perhaps more of that can happen in May if that's the plan of the faculty senate. Here you have maybe some opportunity to look it over, if I can answer your questions...
Schwabe: I've got a question if there is a clarification that you can add. When academic affairs committee reviewed this last week in the meeting and then discussed it afterwards. Basically there are sort-of two components to this. There's the bulleted items with the budget that go together. Then there is the master plan that's sort-of a little bit separate, you might want to address that.
Hurtgen: Well, the bulleted items are merely meant to be highlights for the sake of convenience. The report itself has a number of parts, one of which is the master plan. I was not present for the discussion and the committee and whatever details we've had of the master plan so I cannot comment on that...
Schwabe: But was the master plan, sir, like a best case, longer term, you're not in a sense really asking this body to endorse that or to do what with that?
Hurtgen: It represents, in particular, the master plan represents a vision for what the committee wished to see happen over a period of time. It's obviously based on a number of contingencies. One among them is enrollment and that will drive a financial consideration. It wasn't anyone's expectation that every detail got planned would be met within a year or two or perhaps three. We felt it was important, and the president urged us in September, to think large.
Boynton: Are there other questions? (none) The next item is the program deletion motions. You have those in your packet, sort-of in the middle. We thought that there are six programs that the president and May have recommended be deleted. This was sent to the academic affairs committee. They discussed this and they actually have motions on all of them now. However, when you put things together they had motions on the first four and had not yet come up with the motions for the last two. Because you haven't had information about those, we shouldn't vote on those this week or this month but we can let you know what their recommendations are. Those were the music theory, which the committee is recommending deletion and math physics which the committee is recommending keeping the program. I think we should do this one program at a time and take separate votes on each one and put it in a form of separate motions. We can start maybe with the geochemistry program. Do you have any other information from the committee? I think you have included most of what you have looked at. Any questions?
Man: Have we've got the same sheet that you're talking about?
Boynton: It says "motions to the senate for the April 8th meeting for Academic Affairs Committee". And the first motion it says to retain the geochemistry program.
Man: You mentioned music you said something different (???)
Boynton: What I said was that there's two other programs and those two programs they have not made a motion about when we put the packets together to come out for this meeting. In the meantime they have completed their deliberations on those so it's letting you know. Now the ones that we're intending to vote on today are the four that are in your packet. Jack Berkley is also here today if you'd like to ask him questions and may I assume you may also respond to any questions.
Sara Hamilton: Just a little bit of history here is that these six programs and options were identified I would say, more than two years ago. And through the (???) of these programs we were to work with department chairs in terms of putting those programs on notice that they already were on notice and that they would eventually come forward in some form or fashion in improvement in terms of enrollment. We're encouraged to have a two year ( plan for improvement so that did happen. Second of all, the recommendation also is based on that with regard with working with the SUNY administration programs. We need to be good caretakers of our programs. Programs that are not conducted in many years does not look good to an institution especially when you continue to ask for new programs.
Boynton: So are there any questions on the geochemistry motion? Ready to vote? So the motion as its written is to retain the geochemistry program. All in favour say I.
All: aye Opposed-none
The second program, and I probably should have added this in the beginning. Keep in mind what we do is advisories to the president so because we vote something doesn't necessarily mean its going to happen that way. The second motion there is to retain the industrial management program. Mike Grady is here also if there are any question on This action. Any questions?
Jason Miller: How do you market it? I've never even heard of this program before.
Grady: Well, that's one of the reasons why I think we should retain it is because they're going to have a school of business. We think that we can market this program a lot more effectively as an option through the school of business advertising. If we can just get them to mention that we also have this Industrial Management program which we may change the name to technical management to make it a bit more appealing and less rustbelt sounding. They're basically going to take a look at the whole program and see if we can make it look a little more attractive. There are no other similar programs in SUNY but there is one in Clarkson University that is called Engineering and Management and they have over 200 students in the program so it isn't considered a (sleeper??) program. It does have potential it just hasn't gone on here yet. I think it's worth keeping because it doesn't require any resources and there are no special courses with this program. Students fill up seats in various places around the campus in courses that are already offered.
Man: What does it cost since there is no course cost? Are there any costs associated with the program beyond this (???).
Grady: We have a brochure, the brochure and basically that's it.
Joe Chillberg: I'm kind of curious with the enrollment, if there is anybody here who is involved with the enrollment management committee, what's the prospects of marketing this possible sleeping giant?
Woman: I would say that they're given the possibility to use it, all of its programs and we are looking at specific programs.
Man: What's it really explain to us that way. I'd have to say that we were told two years ago that might be deleted and then they decided not to because the (???) that I remember. And then this year we were told it might be deleted again. There was no increase in students until... or it will be deleted definitely next year. That's not the best (???)
Woman: I know. I apologize for that.
Man: I think one year to revitalize a program is not very long to get it going again. Maybe four or five years (of notice?).
Woman: Any other questions, comments?
Telly: Just one comment. We have talked about, in the business department very much, if at all, and I know that my colleagues and I would really like to have this kind of program so if we can get together with you guys and talk about it, especially if we have a new program of business. I don't see any reason why we can't. The best time to do it is when we're advising students to see if they're interested in this particular program. We haven't done very much and we probably could.
Man: Another possible venue for studies with the program being used, the departments have been going through next year and this year and so on.
Boynton: Are we ready to vote? This is the motion to retain the Industrial Management program. All in favour say I. aye All opposed? none . Ok, the aye's have it. The third motion is on the co-op agriculture motion. That's also been run through the Physics department and Mike Grady is involved with that. That's a motion to delete the co-op agriculture program.
Man: I'm puzzled for the programs that there are motions to keep, we have information about the cost of the program, we have information about majors etcetera. This is the only one of those programs so far that actually has students that actually has majors. Is this an expensive program to maintain? Why are we recommending that we delete it?
Man: Actually, this one has zero current majors as far as agriculture goes.
Man and woman: There are four admitted.
Man: That's admitted, they haven't said they're coming.
Woman: If you look at the other figures, we admitted a lot of people and they didn't end up coming.
Man: I see the fourth, three, zero. The zero means that that's a paid deposits. Deposits mean the students actually came. That's the disappointing part of this program. We get admissions for that deposit, or we get people coming without completing the program. No one's completed the program in recent memory.
Woman: It's a little bit strange in this program, isn't it? Because you don't actually have graduates.
Man: No, it's like the coop engineering program. You're transferring to Cornell University after three years.
Man: Within that program some people end up (???)
Man: That's right. It does have the advantage that it draws a few people here that end up in the biology department.
Man: Does it have a cost associated with it?
Man: Well, not a program. Not a cost involved with teaching courses but there is a fair amount of time involved in replying to all the inquiries. There are quite a few inquiries about the program and very few hits. So if you consider my time and time in dealing with inquires, then that is a cost.
Man: Is that different from the other programs that we are recommending that we keep? In that which, are there inquiries for those programs that people are spending time and money too?
Man: There are inquires but it's much better on this.
Woman: We have one deposited student. Is that right? I'm reading this right in Industrial Management, had one deposit.
Man: There have been five graduates in the last five years in Industrial Management. (???) deposits in the last three years. Some students switch into that program while they're here.
Woman: Any other question, comments? Are we ready to vote on that? This is a motion to delete the co-op agriculture program.
Jan: What happens to the students who have been admitted so far? Do you just say "sorry, the program has been deactivated"? I'm sure they would be notified but what would you do with them?
Man: Actually, I was under the impressions since they were already admitted that they would be allowed to continue.
Woman: They haven't made deposit sheets.
Man: If they do comment, it's a good question.
Woman: We would (???) if there were students in a program that we were deleting (???)
Woman: Are you saying we would let the students graduate but we wouldn't allow new students to...
Woman: You'd have to not accept the deposits anymore, first of all.
Woman: And students who are presently here in those programs would be...are we ready to vote on this one? So this is a motion to delete the co-op agriculture program. All in favour say aye Opposed (3) So the aye's have it. The fourth motion is a motion to delete the undergraduate music history program. I think if we have questions that Sara can answer any questions about that one. Are there any questions?
Woman: Could you just explain what point number three means (on this side??).
Hamilton: General education for music ed have to take a certain amount of history courses and given current resources that's what they can cover. I did talk at length with the head of music history, and while he would love to have this kind of a program, he feels that given our current resources and the focus of the music program that it's unrealistic.
Woman: When you say limited resources, does that mean the faculty?
Woman: Right. We only have one music history professor and he can't do everything.
Woman: What would happen if the senate recommended not to delete it and encouraged kids to consider it.
Hamilton: Well, it hasn't exactly been publicized in the school of music for a long time, which kind of explains the lack of majors. It's not on our informational sheet. I can't tell you why that is because that's been going on long enough. Perhaps even for the last ten years. I think people thought it was already gone actually and they were kind of surprised and apparently when one of our community members looked into admissions in the current figures it wasn't even listed so I think people have thought it was already gone. I'm not saying we wouldn't be interested in having it, but it would be a big focus shift to even recognize that we have it in the first place. There is enrollment possibilities but I think with our current course structure, they would feel uncomfortable offering it. They don't feel we have enough offerings to sustain it, to make it competitive in any way.
Woman: Any other questions?
Man: Just a quick observation, my experience on campus has been that in order to have a major program, you have to have at least three full time faculty members, if not four. With one currently doing the job, we're not talking about just adding a half time person or something along those lines in order to have what we refer to as a viable program. We need some substantial (???) resources or that kind of thing.
Woman: We do have part time faculty teaching some of the courses but in terms of a dedicated faculty member we only have one right now.
Woman: Any other questions or comments? (none). This is a motion to delete the undergraduate history program. All in favour say aye. (Aye). Opposed? (none). Ok. The last thing here came out not quite accurately. It came out as the new American studies major. It's not a new major. We've had American studies major; it's a revision. A somewhat major revision of the American Studies major. We have two new people: Claudia Sadawski-Smith and Christina Jarvis who have taken over coordinating this program so they've gone through a revision and this was sent to the academic affairs committee who are recommending approval of it and Claudia couldn't be here, Christina just gave birth. Bruce will be happy to answer and questions. Do you have something that you want to point out here about this? He's been involved in this.
Bruce Simon: Just one quick detail. You said the major used to be 54 hours so we reduced it to 39 to make it look more attractive to students. So if you have any question I'll be happy to answer those.
Neil Feit: In requirement three it says, the last item. No more than nine credit hours can be taken at the 200 level. Does that mean the 200 level and below?
Simon: I do think it means that.
Neil: Might it be preferable to say 15 credit hours must be taken at 300 or above? If a student wants to take more of these courses then she can take them, but they wouldn't count towards the major.
Man: I like that change. I'm not really in a position to authorize it.
Woman: Actually, I think that he could make a motion to recommend that.
Man: Motion to say at least 15 credit hours must be taken at 300 or above. (Second).
Woman: Any discussion pertaining to that? Ok, now we'll vote on the amendment there. All in favour of changing that to at least 15 hours...
Man: Just say 15-24 since its specified (???) just relate to that paragraph (???)
Man: Does that suggest (???) additionally...
Man: No because he said that students may take more courses than 24 so I think its better the way it was originally phrased. At least a minimum of 15 credits must be 300 or above.
Man: I'd like to get rid of the additional... I withdraw the motion.
Man: Is it in the spirit of your (???) that (???)
Man: Absolutely.
Man: It's in agreeance. He agreed to the change of his amendment. Any other questions?
Man: Now you have to read us the original with the changes.
Joe Chilberg: We vote on the change I believe, and then we vote on the...
Man: yes, that's correct.
Boynton: So the courses come from these two (disciplines?) and no more than 12 credit hours can be taken from any one department. At least 15 credit hours must be at the 300 level or above. All in favour say aye. aye Opposed? (none). Ok, the aye's have it.
Reddy: I have some concerns about the process by means with which these changes were made. I don't know what the process was and I'd be interested in hearing about it if anybody knows. But by the same token I try to avoid being a sociologist as much as possible. However, in looking at least in these circumstances, and not when I'm doing my work within my apartment, when I take a look at the listings of courses here there is virtually no sociology listed. In all fairness one of the things that sociologists do is look in American society and have ideas. In fact, there is more a listing of anthropology here. I have nothing against anthropology, I happen to like anthropologists, but there is virtually no sociology here. For example, under the nine hours of exploratory courses, introduction to sociology is not listed. The focus of that course is primarily on American society. At least America as understood as the United States. Now I understand that America has a broader definition than that but that is at least a part of the story. When you take a look at American cultures, I counted very quickly that there's (60??) that's A and the concentrations. I think there's 65 courses listed there. Very strong representation over any number of departments. Two from sociology. It strikes me that this process has been a mistake. One at least that has omitted giving fair attention to a department that offers a very substantial number of relative courses.
Simon: I want to address the point about the process in two parts. First, the old majors (do not include?) sociology so since George started this, however many decades ago, sociology is not a basis (???). Secondly about processes is that since (Christina Protier??) came here, they have been meeting, spending numerable hours meeting with people, e-mailing people with what (???) committee and they've done a lot for, I can't imagine them doing more to seek input. I'm glad to hear this. I'm glad to hear that the sociology department wants to be more involved in this.
Reddy: I'm not saying that, I'm just asking a question. It may well be, but I'm not certain that it had the opportunity.
Man: Well, I (?) the question because I did not get between the two of them, between all of (???)
Woman: I was at at least one meeting in which all departments are invited to submit courses for this program and urged to submit courses for the program for the advisory committee to consider. I'm not sure why sociology didn't sit in the discussions but they were invited.
Man: There is a big change here in the structure of the program. If that's so, our passage of (???) would not preclude sociology, 72 (years?) some additional courses which they may like to all be included.
Kraus: I absolutely imagine this list is expandable or contractible as needed. What we did do though is change part two. It used to be 12 hours required in exploratory and preparatory courses. It's now designed again with the (gold stream lining??). I can't imagine not being happy to hear expansions to any of these lists. Plus there is a self-defined option that they can choose if people want to.
Woman: Other questions, comments?
Man: Just a clarification that what we are approving is the structure, which we expect will be flexible over time.
Man: I think that's a fair paraphrase.
Woman: I think it has to be because courses come and go.
Man: point of information. Would such additions or deletions require a review or approval of the academic affairs committee?
Boynton: Although that would become a more minor change that wouldn't be brought to this body. All in favour of approving the new revisions of the American Studies major say aye. (aye). Opposed (none). Ok, the aye's have it. That brings us to new business. Do we have any new business? Thank you Sara. I was afraid we were going to bring you all the way over here and not ask you any questions.
Motion to adjourn: Kraus, seconded by Jason Miller-all vote aye.
Meeting adjourned 5:02 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Ray Rushboldt - College Senate Secretary.