MINUTES OF THE ACADEMIC SENATE

February 15, 2002

KU 310, 3:00 p.m.

Presiding: Dr. Brian Conniff

Senators Present: Bartley, Biers, Castellano, Conniff, Dandaneau, Doyle, Dunne, Gerla, Good, Gorton, Gould, Hallinan, Hartley, Kearns, Morman, Pedrotti, Pestello, Phelps, Ruggiero, Saliba, Sargent, Sharma, Watras, Youngkin, Youngblut

Guests: Rogatto

1. Opening Prayer

Brian Conniff began the meeting with a prayer by Mother Teresa.

2. Roll Call

Twenty-five of thirty-nine Senators were present.

3. Approval of Minutes

The minutes of January 4, 2002 were approved as written.

4. Committee Reports

Academic Policies Committee: Jim Dunne reported for the APC.

The committee is currently reviewing a report on the university-wide evaluation of general education (GE), which was submitted by the University Committee on General Education and Competencies, a subcommittee of the APC.

Generally, the overall GE program is well received by all academic units, although Thematic Clusters received a mixed evaluation because of concerns with availability, integration and flexibility.

In response to the report, the APC intends to establish two subcommittees. One will review and propose an updated Section II, Rationale and Goals, of the General Education Policy. This group will comprise both APC members and other faculty across the university. The other subcommittee, to be made up of APC members only, will propose a revision of Section V, Administration, of the GE policy to reflect the new role of the Associate Dean for Connected Learning.

Questions

1. What is the timeframe for the subcommittee work? The group revising Section V should be finished by the end of this term; the group working on Section II hopes to be done by early next school year.

2. What groups were involved in the report? The General Education and Assessment committees from each academic unit participated. Input was gathered from students, administrators, focus groups, and the College Academic Affairs Committee.

Student Academic Policies Committee: Sean Bartley reported that the SAPC is working on the following issues:

a. 18^th credit hour. The SAPC is reviewing the current 17-credit hour tuition cap. It plans to submit a proposal to the ELC as part of the fall 2002 budget process. [NOTE: The committee will present a proposal to the Senate in Fall 2002 prior to any actions with the ELC]

b. Academic advisor evaluations.

c. Summer course scheduling times. There is concern to make sure that enough minutes are taught in the summer sessions to fill three credit hours. The group is currently collecting data from different departments.

Faculty Affairs Committee: Harry Gerla reported that the FAC is working on the following issues:

a. Extension of tenure track. The committee is reviewing the recommendation that tenure track faculty be able to extend the seven-year tenure track up to ten years in case of an interruption due to medical or family care reasons.

b. Maternity/paternity leave. In conjunction with the tenure track issue, the committee will also consider maternity/paternity leave.

c. Academic Senate voting rights for faculty on leave or sabbatical. The FAC recommends changing the current policy, which prohibits faculty members on leave from voting on Academic Senate constitution amendments. The Executive Committee approved the FAC proposal that faculty members serving on the Academic Senate and who are on leave or sabbatical be notified in writing of their option to abstain or cast a ballot on constitution amendments. This recommendation will be sent to the Provost.

5. Senate Document 1-02-01, Resolution in support of proposal by the Office of Human Resources to modify eligibility standards for the tuition exchange program.

Harry Gerla, on behalf of the Faculty Affairs Committee, submitted a non-binding resolution in support of a proposal by the Office of Human Resources to change the tuition exchange program.

The current policy implies that if the University employs more than one person in the family, the eligibility standards for both parents are affected if they participate in the tuition exchange.

The Faculty Affairs Committee recommends that the Senate approve the effort by Human Resources to clarify the tuition exchange standards, so that only one of the family members will lose eligibility at a time, not both at once. It further recommends that Human Resources specifies that the family member with the most seniority must be the first to take advantage of the program.

Vote on the issue:

For: 23

Opposed: 0

6. Honors and Scholars Review

Steve Dandaneau distributed a memorandum regarding likely future Senate actions related to a proposal for two new University of Dayton degrees as part of the restructuring of the University Honors and Scholars Programs. The new degrees are for 1) an Honors Degree for graduates of the new Honors Program; and 2) an Honors Degree, with John W. Berry, Sr., Scholars Program Notation for graduates of the new John W. Berry, Sr., Scholars Program.

Questions

1. What is the reasoning for these new degrees? It was based, in part, on the recommendation of the consultant who proposed the restructuring of the current programs. Also, there will likely be other new degree proposals, such as one for the Chaminade scholars program.

2. What is the difference between students who now graduate with Honors and the proposed Honors degrees? Students in the Honors program must fulfill certain program requirements, as opposed to many students who graduate with high GPAs and are acknowledged for their efforts.

3. What percentage of a given class will be part of the restructured Honors and Scholars Program? It will be no more than 10-15% of any class. Program enrollment will be carefully monitored.

4. Is it possible for University of Dayton students to enroll in the programs? Yes, through their second year. The Honors and Scholars Program will seek to inform students of this opportunity.

5. It was suggested that discussions be held with the English Department, along with the College and professional schools, about the enrollment implications.

7. Presidential Search

The questions developed by the Executive Committee for the Presidential Search were distributed. They were based on issues important to the campus and prior to reviewing any candidate information.

Questions

1. No question contains reference to “academic freedom.” Should it be included? We are waiting for the candidates to address this issue, but will be prepared to bring it up if any candidate does not.

An announcement of the new president is expected Monday, February 18, 2002 at 4 p.m. in the KU Ballroom.

The meeting adjourned at 3:45 p.m.

Respectfully submitted: Heidi Good, Secretary of the Academic Senate