UCAP Meeting of 11/06/2008 2008-2009 agenda status: approved Agenda: University Committee on Academic Policy AGENDA Amended Thursday, November 6, 2008 10:15 A.M. to 12:00 P.M. Board Room, 4th Floor, Administration Building
minutes status: approved approved at meeting of 11/20/2008 UCAP Minutes for meeting held on 11/06/2008 University Committee on Academic Policy Thursday, October 23, 2008 10:15 A.M. to 12:00 P.M. Board Room, Administration Building Minutes Attendees: Mary Jo Arndt, Dennis Banks, R. Sekhar Chivukula, Peter Cobbett, Marty Crimp, Doug Estry, Mandalyn Griffin, Richard Hallgren, Caroline Hartig, Linda Jackson, Chris Kline, Carolyn Loeb, Brad McDonald, Matthew McKeon, Jerry Punch, A. Mahdi Saeed, Michael Schechter, Parita Shah, Sharif Shakrani, Michael Shields, Jim Smith, Tom Volkening Absent: Chris Kline, Hovig Kouyoumdjian, Michael Lawrence The Agenda was approved as amended by adding an item to the agenda: formation of subcommittee for Integrity of Scholarship and Grades The Minutes from the October 23, 2008 meeting were approved. Comments from the Chair: Chairperson Chivukula reported that at its October 7 meeting, ECAC decided to reduce its recommendation to Faculty Council regarding the size of the Academic Year Taskforce from 15 members to 6 members with other administrative attendees ex officio members. The charge to the Academic Year Taskforce will be an action item at the next Faculty Council meeting on November 14. Also on November 14, Faculty Council will discuss next steps for the Healthcare Options Taskforce recommendations. MSU’s healthcare contract ends in 2009. At its next meeting on November 18, the Academic Council will host a presentation on long-term university financial issues with the intention of increasing transparency. As discussed at the last Academic Council meeting, there are no financial problems related to the recent economic downturn on the horizon for MSU. Comments from the Associate Provost Associate Provost Estry reported that the University Learning Assistant (ULA) policy had been published in the Academic Programs catalogue. He noted the online format of the Academic Programs catalogue had been renovated and now includes searchable database. Dr. Estry reported that his office was still collecting data regarding Course Repeat policy and would continue but was unsure the data would provide answers to some of the questions the committee expressed. Dr. Cobbett asked if the Angel system could be used to survey students about Course Repeat policy. Dr. Estry mentioned that Dr. Banks had already conducted an informal survey of a small group of students and had preliminary data. Further discussion was deferred to Roundtable. UCC Comprehensive Proposal 1 Linda Good, Chairperson, University Committee on Curriculum Doug McKenna, Associate Registrar The committee unanimously granted voice to Dr. Good and Associate Registrar McKenna. Chairperson Chivukula summarized past committee discussion about the Proposal and the committee’s concern about possible overlaps between specializations and minors. As a result, UCAP had asked UCC to provide clarification on the distinction between a specialization and a minor before concluding its deliberations on the matter. UCC Chairperson Linda Good reported that, after several discussions regarding clarification of definitions, the UCC recommends the original definitions for minors and specializations stand. After committee discussion, a motion made by Jerry Punch passed unanimously.
Request to Establish a Minor in Computer Science with an Admission Requirement Thomas Wolff, Associate Dean, College of Engineering Richard Enbody, Chair person, Department of Computer Science and Engineering Curriculum Committee The committee unanimously granted voice to Associate Dean Wolff and Dr. Enbody. Dr. Enbody explained to the committee that the College of Engineering has proposed a minor to accommodate the strong student interest in adding a computer science knowledge base to their credentials. In order to insure students enrolled in the minor are as well prepared for success in the computer science classes as engineering majors, the college requests UCAP’s approval for an admission requirement of an average of 3.0 GPA in two specific courses. Associate Dean Wolff added that engineering accreditation requires majors to have a 2.9 GPA based in a set of core courses. As a limited enrollment college, admissions to the minor would also be capped. Associate Dean Wolff indicated that, in situations where applications to the minor exceeded the openings, the College of Engineering uses a holistic review of factors to determine which students to admit. Although grades are an important consideration, students have an opportunity in the admission process to present any extenuating circumstances. Committee discussion centered on:
The inclusion of a process allowing students who do not meet the 3.0 GPA criteria to be evaluated including materials or data that would make a case for admission. Motion by Marty Crimp passed unanimously.
Formation of Integrity of Scholarship and Grades Subcommittee (ISG) Chairperson Chivukula stated that Carolyn Loeb had agreed to chair the ISG subcommittee. Rick Hallgren and Brad McDonald agreed to serve on the committee. The subcommittee goal will be to revise the proposed ISG policy in light of suggestions made by UCFA, UCSA, and University Ombudsman Stan Soffin. UCG will provide comments and have provided the text of a policy proposal that was made in 2004. ASMSU may provide feedback. January 2009 is desired completion date of the revised document in order to move the policy forward to ECAC for action in Spring 2009. Suggestions that refer to AFR issues will be referred to Student Services. Roundtable Dennis Banks created a survey for undergraduates regarding course repeat credits. 350 surveys were distributed and approximately 100 undergraduates responded. Dr. Banks’ survey and data will be forwarded to committee members. Dr. Cobbett inquired whether the committee should survey a wider group of students to obtain information such as would students retake a class even if they achieved higher than a 2.0 in order to improve their score. He contended that students don’t understand that policy states the course repeat grade stands even in cases where the repeat grade is lower than the initial grade earned and students don’t know that professional schools often will not accept a repeat grade, in some cases average the grades, or practice other methods of discounting a repeat grade. Chairperson Chivukula stated it was his sense that data collection regarding course repeat policy issue will be complete in time for committee discussion in Spring 09. Dr. Shakrani asked when the academic year taskforce would report. Dr. Chivukula thought March 2009. Brad Mc Donald reported that ASMSU has been discussing course repeat policy and will provide input to UCAP. Meeting adjourned at 11:25 am. Respectfully submitted by Sandra Walther |
Agenda/Minutes > 2008-2009 >