UCAP Meeting of 10/21/2010 2010-2011 agenda status: approved Agenda: University Committee on Academic Policy
AGENDA Thursday, October 7, 2010 10:15 A.M. to 12:00 P.M. Board Room, 4th Floor, Administration Building
minutes status: approved approved at meeting of 11/04/2010 UCAP Minutes for meeting held on 10/21/2010 University Committee on Academic Policy MINUTES Thursday, October 21, 2010 10:15 A.M. to 12:00 P.M. Attendees: Paul Abramson, Gillian Bice, Crystal Branta, Lisa Cook, Laura Dillon, Doug Estry, Anita Ezzo, Fred Fico, Kathleen Hoag, Dan Keathley, Evan Martinak, Matthew McKeon, Tom Morse, Mary Noel, Justin O’Dell, Helene Pazak, John Reifenberg, Christopher Scales, Mike Shields, Jim Smith, Mary Kay Smith Not Attending: Emily Storrer, Chenguang Wang The Agenda was approved. The minutes of the October 7, 2010 meeting were approved. Comments from the Chairperson Chairperson Bice reported that the Provost had recently given two presentations that were available on http://provost.msu.edu. These were data intense presentations that focused on changes in MSU faculty and student demographics, revenues, and financial aid. She encouraged UCAP members to look at the presentations. Comments from Associate Provost for Undergraduate Education Associate Provost Estry stated that the Office of the Registrar, in collaboration with AIS, had completed the implementation plan for the proposed revisions to the Course Repeat Policy. The proposal is now ready to forward to ECAC. Request for the Merger of the Department of French Classics and Italian with the Department of Spanish and Portuguese David Prestel, Chairperson, Department Merger Transition Team Susan Gass, Interim Chairperson, Departments of French, Classics, & Italian and Spanish and Portuguese. The committee unanimously granted voice to Drs. Prestel and Gass. Professor Prestel provided a history of the decentralization and subsequent separation that created the two departments. The proposed merger of the two departments would be facilitated by the renovation of Wells Hall that will allow the language programs to be housed together. In addition, a department organizational structure, similar to that in Linguistics and Languages, would allow subgroups to function as mini-departments, relieving the entire department from having to make decisions on matters that affect only the subgroup. Dr. Gass stated that the merger would not affect students and no faculty would be disadvantaged. She also added that affected faculty had raised no concerns about the reunification of the programs in the many consultation meetings in which the proposed merger was discussed; in fact, the faculty seemed pleased with the proposed merger of the two departments. After a brief question and answer period, voice was withdrawn from Drs. Prestel and Gass. Motion by Kathleen Hoag passed unanimously. The University Committee on Academic Policy, in response to the request by the Executive Committee of the Academic Council to examine this proposal, has no concerns with the request for the merger of the Department of French Classics and Italian with the Department of Spanish and Portuguese. Request for Moratorium on Admission to the Undergraduate Specialization in Canadian Studies Ann Marie Schneider, Acting Director, Canadian Studies Center The committee unanimously granted voice to Ms. Schneider. Ms. Schneider explained that a moratorium on admission to the undergraduate specialization in Canadian Studies would allow the program to reexamine the ways in which the specialization could be made to be more relevant to undergraduate student interests and the interests of the Canadian Center. She noted that the current course content appeared to be outdated and required courses were taught irregularly, therefore requiring a longer time to degree for students interested in the program or the need to make course substitutions. The moratorium would allow the comprehensive review of specialization requirements, student recruitment to the program, and alignment with the research interests of the Canadian Studies Center. The program had the potential to optimize student interest areas such as sustainable environment, human nutrition, animal health, anthropology, fisheries and wildlife, and climate change. Ms Schneider noted that the Canadian Studies Center received cooperation from the Consulate General of Canada in the form of small grants and support of applications for research funds. She expressed concern that, if the Canadian Studies specialization was not revitalized, that support could diminish. The committee withdrew voice from Ms. Schneider. After committee discussion regarding the necessity of a moratorium, the nature of Canadian Studies programs at other higher education institutions, and the political ramifications of a moratorium on the specialization, the committee returned voice to Ms. Schneider so that she might respond to their concerns and after her response withdrew voice from Ms. Schneider. Professor Fico noted that the committee had expressed concerns about two issues related to the request for a moratorium on the Canadian Studies specialization:
2. The degree to which the undergraduate specialization is tied into the matrix by which the center is funded. A motion was made by Jim Smith to forward the Provost with strong reservations. Subsequent discussion centered on the committee’s articulation of its concerns in order to include them in its recommendation to the Provost. There was also discussion on how to move forward with the motion. After debate about process, Chairperson Bice ruled that the committee would vote on each statement to determine if it should be included in the motion and then vote on a motion that would include the committee’s reservations. The committee’s vote on each concern follows:
The following friendly amendment by Associate Provost Estry to the motion by Professor Smith passed unanimously.
UCAP generally believed that placing a moratorium on the Specialization could encourage faculty to move more quickly to invigorate a program that, as presented, had very low enrollment, very few graduates, and was in need of significant curricular reform.
2. Anecdotal data would suggest that there is growing interest among students in North American studies. Placing a moratorium on the program could adversely impact future enrollments. 3. Concern was raised about political sensitivities, as our Canadian partners might perceive this as a disinvestment in Canadian Studies more broadly. 4. The scarcity and uniqueness of the program would suggest that, whether done through a moratorium or through aggressive curricular reform without a moratorium, the faculty associated with the Canadian Studies Center should move quickly to propose changes if their intent is to have a viable undergraduate specialization. Institutional Data Policy The committee unanimously approved the response to ECAC as provided by Chairperson Bice. Proposed Reorganization of Basic Biomedical Departments: Discussion Chairperson Bice provided some background on ECAC’s request that UCAP provide commentary on the Provost’s proposed reorganization of the basic biomedical departments. She noted that, of the five committees asked by ECAC to provide comments on the proposal, UCFA was the first to provide a reply. Although UGC had considered the request at its most recent meeting, they had not yet forwarded a response. Dr. Bice suggested the committee first identify questions of clarification regarding the materials sent to them by ECAC and the Provost and, based on the questions, invite guests to attend the next UCAP meeting to respond. She added that in the report to ECAC, the committee could be specific in any recommendations or questions that should be addressed prior to making the decision to proceed with the reorganization. Associate Provost Estry reported that there seemed to be some confusion on how the 4-unit management of the biomedical departments would work. It appeared there has been a problem with accountability and that the Provost was seeking an organizational structure to create accountability relative to colleges’ management of these departments. Dr. Estry reviewed the proposed reporting structure changes in light of how they might create more accountability for the quality and success of the biomedical science programs. Dr. Estry noted that the proposal does not provide details on how undergraduate issues will be handled and how the proposed reporting structure might create difficulties for undergraduate programs such as Physiology that would be overseen by the CNS dean while the unit reports primarily to the CHM Dean. Clarification of resource commitment and, based on this percent faculty distribution among the four colleges was provided. In the brief committee discussion, two questions were brought forward.
As the meeting was nearing its end, Chairperson Bice suggested that committee members email their questions to her with copies to Sandra Walther. The questions would then be compiled and returned to the committee in time for discussion at its November 4 meeting. She reminded committee members to relate their questions to UCAP’s role, focused on undergraduate education. It was noted that within the departments being considered for reorganization, there were three undergraduate majors and a large population of pre-professional students. She reiterated the importance of considering how these students might be affected by the administrative restructuring. Dr. Estry asked the members to consider how this kind of change could foster innovation in the transformation of life science education, which is an issue nationally and at Michigan State. After Roundtable, the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Sandra Walther |
Agenda/Minutes > 2010-2011 >