Agenda/Minutes‎ > ‎2009-2010‎ > ‎

2010 - 02/25

UCAP Meeting of 02/25/2010

2009-2010



agenda status: approved

Agenda:

University Committee on Academic Policy
AGENDA
Thursday, February 25, 2010
10:15 A.M. to 12:00 P.M.
Board Room, 4th Floor, Administration Building

    1. Approval of the Agenda


    2. Approval of the February 11, 2010 Minutes


    3. Comments from the Chairperson


    4. Comments from the Associate Provost for Undergraduate Education


    5. Request for a Moratorium on Admission to the Bachelor of Science Degree in Environmental Soil Science .........(Attachment)
      Richard Brandenburg, Assistant Dean, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources
      James Crum, Professor, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences


    6. Request for a New Specialization in Sustainability .........(Attachment)
      Richard Brandenburg, Assistant Dean, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources
      Laurie Thorp, Coordinator, RISE Program
      Geoff Habron, Associate Professor, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife


    7. Course Repeat Policy - Report on Feedback


    8. SIRS/SOCT Subcommittee Report


    9. Roundtable: All Other Business



minutes status: approved

approved at meeting of 03/18/2010

UCAP Minutes for meeting held on 02/25/2010


University Committee on Academic Policy
Minutes
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Board Room, 4th Floor, Administration Building


Attendees: Paul Abramson, Gillian Bice, Crystal Branta, R. Sekhar Chivukula, Peter Cobbett, Lisa Cook, Marty Crimp, Doug Estry, Anita Ezzo, Melanie Helton, Suzanne Lang, Matt McKeon, Henry Reinart, Mahdi Saeed, Chris Scales, Mike Shields, Jim Smith

Not Attending: Jon Beaulac, Fred Fico, Michael Ly, John Reifenberg, Mary Kay Smith, Dan Tratt

The Agenda was approved.

The Minutes of the February 11, 2010 minutes were approved as amended. Roundtable comments regarding SIRS/SOCT subcommittee attributed to Associate Provost Estry were made by Professor Chivukula.

Comments from the Chairperson
Chairperson Crimp reported that the Academic Year Taskforce has developed a series of 7-year academic calendars that will be provided to the appropriate bodies in academic governance to facilitate further discussion on proposed changes to the academic calendar.

Comments from the Associate Provost for Undergraduate Education
No comments were made by Associate Provost Estry.

Request for a Moratorium on Admission to the Bachelor of Science Degree in Environmental Soil Science
Richard Brandenburg, Assistant Dean, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources
James Crum, Professor, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences

The committee granted voice to Drs. Brandenburg and Crum.

Dr. Crum stated that the faculty of the Department of Crop and Soil Science has no objection to the moratorium on the Bachelor of Science degree in Environmental Soil Science. Dr. Brandenburg stated that the single student majoring in Environmental Soil Science had changed majors. Dr. Crum noted the department was committed to doing whatever necessary to make sure this student had the resources necessary to build a program that meets the student’s needs.

The committee withdrew voice from Drs. Brandenburg and Crum.

Motion by Melanie Helton passed unanimously.
      The University Committee on Academic Policy, in its consultative capacity to the Provost, has no concerns about the request for a moratorium on admission to the Bachelor of Science degree in Environmental Soil Science.
Request for a New Specialization in Sustainability
Richard Brandenburg, Assistant Dean, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources
Laurie Thorp, Coordinator, RISE Program
Geoff Habron, Associate Professor, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife

The committee granted voice to Drs. Brandenburg, Habron, and Thorp.

Associate Provost Estry reminded the committee that development of the Sustainability Specialization been discussed by UCAP two years earlier. The Provost had asked for the committee’s recommendation on whether the specialization should reside in the Office of the Provost. UCAP recommended the specialization report to a college. UCAP members had been impressed with the program and urged that it move forward.

Assistant Dean Brandenburg remarked that the specialization would be open to variety of student majors. Drs. Habron and Thorp had conceived the specialization and a consortium of colleges and departments, headed by Associate Dean Foster and housed in CARRS, provided resources and input on the details of the specialization. Drs. Habron and Thorp provided an overview of how the administration, curriculum, student guidance, and assessment of learning outcomes and required portfolios would be managed. Key points made were that the specialization:
    • would be cross-disciplinary, with faculty representation from six colleges.
    • would require the student defense of a capstone portfolio of work.
    • would be competency based. Students must submit evidence of knowledge in core areas.
    • would include co-curricular activities as part of the portfolio
    • would have faculty as the stewards of competency areas in the curriculum.
    • Competency teams would be constituted by faculty that would assess the student portfolios and provide constructive feedback to the students.
    • would provide advisers who would work closely with students to develop competency plans, focusing on content and process.
    • Will have an advisory committee with representation from alumni, government, business and civil society to provide advice on emerging interests and opportunities and to ensure the program is relevant to current societal needs.

The committee questions revolved around the following issues:
    • would the requirements of the specialization increase student time-to degree?
    • management of the portfolio assessment process
    • how would the portfolio assessment be carried out
    • how would faculty be recruited
    • what is the process of incorporating specialization competencies and rubric in other course requirements
    • how will the program track its success
    • is the program funding sustainable
The committee withdrew voice from Drs. Brandenburg, Habron, and Thorp.

Motion by Dr. Bice passed unanimously.
      The University Committee on Academic Policy, in its consultative capacity to the Provost, enthusiastically recommends the request for new specialization in Sustainability.

Chairperson Crimp requested that the Sustainability Specialization team provide feedback on the progress of the program to the committee over the next few years.

Course Repeat Policy – Report on Feedback
Associate Provost Estry distributed copies of the responses to the committee’s request for feedback on the proposed changes to the course repeat policy. The Office of the Registrar indicated that some of the committee’s requests might not be feasible from a programming standpoint. The Director of Financial Aid responded that he had no concerns that changes in the course repeat policy would negatively affect students’ financial aid. The Dean of the Graduate School responded that, as an undergraduate policy, the changes would have no impact on graduate studies. Three associate deans and one faculty representative on the University Graduate Committee had responded expressing a variety of concerns or support.

Committee consensus was that feedback that is more substantial was needed. Specifically, the Office of the Registrar (RO) did not answer all of the questions posed by the committee and additional feedback would be wanted from that office. Members suggested that feedback be sought from the University Curriculum Committee, UGAAD Small Group, and that colleges be given more time for response in order to include faculty voice in the discussion.

Members discussed ways to collect additional relevant data and to explore the possible systemic support that could be developed by the RO. Given the change would support the academic mission of the University, what compelling evidence could be provided in support of the proposal and how would the committee position the proposal to receive the response and buy-in from academic governance next year.

The committee asked the course repeat policy taskforce to provide further feedback and data for full committee review by the April 15, 2010.

SIRS/SOCT Subcommittee Report
Professor Chivukula reminded the committee that the subcommittee’s approach toward SIRS/SOCT reform would be incremental. The subcommittee proposed first taking steps to test whether the online SIRS response rate could be enhanced in a summer ‘10 pilot program. The subcommittee would work with a dozen or so courses to demonstrate that a change in online SIRS participation procedures could increase the student response rate and departments could customize SIRS questionnaires as needed. The AIS technical support staff confirmed the SIRS customization and program modification was feasible. The procedural change in the administration of online SIRS would increase student participation by requiring the student to either decline or complete SIRS surveys for their courses in order to view their semester grades. The viewing restriction would be lifted after one week.
Mr. Reinhart stated that in casual discussion, ASMSU: representatives expressed no concern with imposing up to a one-week delay in viewing grades in order to increase SIRS participation. He noted students would have the opportunity to decline participation.

Motion by R. Sekhar Chivukula passed unanimously.
      The University Committee on Academic policy approves the implementation of a SIRS summer ‘10 pilot as envisioned by the SIRS/SOCT subcommittee.

Roundtable
There were no roundtable comments.


Respectfully submitted by
Sandra Walther