April 20, 2010

You are here

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly version

Approved 10/19/2010
2009-10:8

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

ACADEMIC COUNCIL

MINUTES

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

3:15 p.m., 115 International Center


PRESENT:
Provost Wilcox, J. Schwille (for C. Ames), J. Armstrong, V. Bali, N. Berger, C. Brown, M. Burleson, M.W. Chang, C. Coursaris, T. Covassin, M. Crimp, K. Currier, W. Davidson, V. Draine, K. Dysarz, R.K. Edozie, J. Epstein, S. Esquith, D. Estry, L. Fernandez, M. Fillmore, J. Forger, J. Foss, J. Francese, L. Good, J.I. Gray, A. Grubbs, S. Hassan, R. Hill, J. Hoehn, C. Alsup (for J.. Howarth, J. Hu, H. Hughes, C. Jackson-Elmoore, M. Jain, L. June, S. Kendall, R.J. Kirkpatrick, K. Klomparens, W. Kopachik, M. Largent, G. Booth (for E. Lashbrooke), M. Leumann, L. Leavitt, M. Ly, R. Maleczka, E. Manoppo, G. Martinez, H. Melakeberhan, T. Miller, D. Moriarty, M. Mundt, M. Noel, R. Ofoli, E. Outslay, C. Parker-Lee, L. Posey, J. Powell, K. Pressley, A. Sousa (for M. Rappley), M. Reckase, J. Revitte, E. Freedman (for J. Riedinger), P. Rogers, L. Roman, C. Schmitt, M. Sciarni, D. Sheridan, A. Shevchenko, M. Shields, S. Spees (for E. Simmons), H.P. Sin, J. Slade, S. Soffin, K. Spencer, D. St. Arnault, D. Sefcifk (for W. Strampel), Z. Taylor, T. Tims, T. Wolff (for S. Udpa), D. Weber, B. Wernette, P. Whitten, S. Wildman, J. Wright, D. Prestel (for K. Wurst), J. Youatt, B. Zandstra

ABSENT: President Simon, K. Ames, R. Appel, M. Baba, M. Bremigan, L. Brooks, C. Corley, T. Curry, L. Degi, J. DeMantes, D. Dougherty, G. Faulk, R. Fernandez, H. Fitzgerald, W. Fu, S. Garnett, C. Gelbke, D. Gift, K. Goldsberry, C. Haka, R. Hall, S. Hoerr, G. Hudson, N. Khanna, G. Kortemeyer, A. Lawton, M. Lawrence, C. Lotz, R. Mabokela, E. Maloziec, T. Marsh, E. Martinak, N. Mehta, P.S. Mohankumar, R. Naegele, T. Neal, L. Neuder, S. Nicley, J. Owen, J. Ren, N. Rovig, B. Schutte, G. Schuttler, A. Simms, L. Stanford, M. Sticklen, T. Ten Eyck, C. Walsh, J. Whitherspoon, M. Willemin, R.W. Wiseman, H. Young, M. Zile

The meeting began at 3:18 p.m. with a full quorum. 

Approval of Agenda:
The agenda was approved as distributed.  

Public Comments:
Chris Kulesza, MSU senior and student intern in the Governance Office, noted this was his last Academic Council meeting and thanked Council for the opportunity to participate in academic governance for the past three years.  Chris then “rick rolled” the members.

Approval of Minutes:
The minutes of March 23, 2010 were approved as distributed.

Proposed Bylaw Amendments:
Professor Kendall, Chairperson of UCAG, made a motion to approve the Proposed Bylaws posted on the website with edits based on the discussions in Academic Council March 23 & 30, 2010.  The motion was supported.  Professor Good, UCC Chairperson, moved the following amendments:

Motion to replace 4.4.3 with the following:
4.4.3. The UniversityCommittee on Undergraduate Studiesshall exercise the faculty's delegated authority on grading policy for undergraduate students, [and the use of grades and grade point averages for the admission to, advancement in, or graduation from academic programs].

Rationale:  This proposed wording separates the responsibilities related to grading from the responsibilities related to curriculum (indicated in the proposed new article 4.4.4 below). The last part of this sentence is new and further clarifies the responsibilities in current practice.

Motion to add the following after 4.4.3 (it will be 4.4.4 and subsequent articles will need to be renumbered):
4.4.4. The UniversityCommittee on Undergraduate Studiesshall review all changes in academic programs proposed by academic units and recommend their approval or rejection to the University Committee on Curriculum.

Rationale: This wording appropriately reflects the “review” that UCUS completes relative to curriculum.  The main distinction here is that courses are not reviewed by UCUS.

Motion to replace 4.4.4 with the following (if the addition of new 4.4.4 is approved, this becomes 4.4.5):
4.4.5. The University Committee on Undergraduate Studies shall have shared responsibility with the Dean of Undergraduate Studies to consult with the Provost on the establishment, moratorium, discontinuance, or merger of undergraduate academic programs and on policy pertaining to curriculum revision, methods of instruction, evaluation of instruction, advising and counseling for undergraduate students and academic programs, [and on other policy pertaining to undergraduate education.]  On issues of establishment, moratorium, discontinuance, and merger of academic programs, the University Council and Faculty Senate will be informed of the Committee's consultation with the Provost. 

Rationale:  Change is the order of mention…a moratorium happens before a discontinuance.  Also adds the responsibility to consult with the Provost on policy, beyond those specifically mentioned, that may impact undergraduate education.  This retains, as appropriate, the parallel structure with UCGS.

Motion to replace 4.4.7 (it would become 4.4.8 if changes above are approved) with the following:
4.4.8. The UniversityCommittee on Undergraduate Studiesshall coordinate its activities with those of other committees, as appropriate.

Rationale:  No need to single out UCC.  Also, some committees with whom consultation is needed may not be Standing Committees.

Motion to replace 4.5.3 with the following:
4.5.3. The UniversityCommittee on Curriculum shall exercise the faculty's delegated authority to review and approve or reject all changes in undergraduate curricula, and degree requirements recommended by the University Committee on Undergraduate Studies and to review and approve or reject changes in graduate and graduate-professional, curricula, and degree requirements, recommended by the University Committee on Graduate Studies. The University Committee on Curriculum shall not reject a recommendation from either the University Committee on Undergraduate Studies or the University Committee on Graduate Studies, without providing a rationale for the rejection and consulting with the appropriate committee.  In addition, the UniversityCommittee on Curriculum shall exercise the faculty's delegated authority to review and approve or rejectall undergraduate and graduate courses proposed by academic units.

Rationale:  Added back the words “review and” because the review of curriculum, degree requirements, and courses is a role of University Committee on Curriculum. The added  statement, prevents UCC from rejecting a recommendation from either UCUS or UCGS, without providing a rationale and seeking further consultation with the appropriate committee.

Motion to replace 4.5.5 with the following:
4.5.5. The UniversityCommittee onCurriculumshall coordinate its activities with those of other Committees, as appropriate.

Rationale:  No need to single out UCUS and UCGS.  Also, some committees with whom consultation is needed may not be Standing Committees.

Motion to replace 4.8.3 with the following:
4.8.3. The University Committee onGraduate Studiesshall exercise the faculty's delegated authority on grading policy for graduate and graduate-professional students.

Rationale: Separates the responsibilities related to grading from the responsibilities related to curriculum as parallel with wording in 4.4.3 for UCUS.

Motion to add the following after 4.8.3 (it will be 4.8.4 and subsequent articles will need to be renumbered):
4.8.4. The UniversityCommittee on Graduate Studiesshall review all changes in academic programs proposed by academic units and recommend their approval or rejection to the University Committee on Curriculum.

Rationale: This wording appropriately reflects the “review” that UCGS completes relative to curriculum.  The main distinction here is that courses are not reviewed by UCGS.

Motion to replace 4.8.4 with the following (if the addition of 4.8.4 above is approved, this becomes 4.8.5):
4.8.5. The University Committee onGraduate Studiesshall have shared responsibility with the Dean of The Graduate School to consult with the Provost on the establishment, moratorium, discontinuance, or merger of graduate programs, on policy pertaining to methods of instruction, evaluation of instruction, advising and counseling, admissions and retention of graduate and graduate-professional students, and on other policy pertaining to administration of graduate and graduate-professional programs. On issues of establishment, moratorium, discontinuance, and merger of academic programs, the University Council and Faculty Senate will be informed of the Committee’s consultation with the Provost.

Rationale:  The only change is the order of mention…a moratorium happens before a discontinuance.

Motion to replace 4.8.10 with the following (if the addition of 4.8.4 above is approved, this becomes 4.8.11):
4.8.11. The University Committee onGraduate Studiesshall coordinate its activities with those of other committees, as appropriate.

Rationale:  No need to single out UCC and UCUS.  Also, some committees with whom consultation is needed may not be Standing Committees.

The above motions to amend were seconded.  The motion was passed to approve the amendments. 

Kristy Currier, Chairperson of Academic Assembly of ASMSU, proposed a motion to amend 3.5.3.  deleting the words “the Academic Assembly of ASMSU”.  The motion was seconded.  The students feel the Secretary should not be an ex officio member since this would violate the ASMSU Constitution to have a non undergraduate student seated.  The Secretary indicated this change is agreeable.  The motion passed.

Professor Hill asked about 4.4.1.1. and why the statement “However the University Committee on Undergraduate Studies has the responsibility to report to the Faculty Senate on issues that relate to establishment, disbandment, or merger of undergraduate academic programs.” Has been deleted?  Professor Good responded that this issue is now addressed in 4.4.4. which states that the University Committee on Undergraduate Studies first considers issues of establishment, moratoriums, discontinuance and merger of programs and informs the University Council and Faculty Senate of the Committee’s consultation with the Provost.  Provost Wilcox reviewed the current process.  In a typical situation when a program is reviewed, a Dean makes a recommendation to the Provost to consider discontinuance of a program.  The Provost’s expectation is there has been consultation at the College level and he then sends it to UCAP or UGC.  It is the responsibility of UCAP or UCG to advise the Provost.  The advice comes back to the Provost, who then in consultation with the President, makes a determination on the discontinuance.  If the decision is to discontinue, the UCC is advised on that decision and they go through the process of withdrawing the curriculum and making the adjustments.  The proposed amendment indicates the two committees will advise the Provost and simultaneously the Faculty Senate and University Council will be informed of the consultation to the Provost.  Both the faculty Senate and University Council has the opportunity if they choose to offer advice to the Provost.  This leaves the decision on program creation and discontinuance with the Provost in consultation with the President.  This also leaves the curricular decisions with the faculty. 

Professor Kendall noted the current proposed amendments allows more voice by all parties at an earlier step in the process.  Justin Epstein spoke in favor of the amendments.

The motions proposed by Professor Good were approved.

Professor Maleczka noted that 3.4.2.9. has been deleted, which deals with the liaison with the BOT.  The President did comment at the last meeting that she would not support this amendment.  Professor Maleczka asked why this was deleted.  Professor Kendall explained that the liaison group is set up by the BOT so it should not be part of the Bylaws for Academic Governance.  Provost Wilcox added it is the BOT’s decision to determine the liaison group.  Professor Maleczka moved to reinstate 3.4.2.9. on pages 29 & 30.  The motion was seconded.  Shannon Nicely, COGS representative, amended to add at the end of the first sentence “and representation analogous to the current student liaison board.”  The amendment to the amendment was seconded and passed.  The main motion to reinstate 3.4.2.9. was not approved. 

Professor June made a motion in 4.9.3. to delete Dean of Undergraduate Studies in the first sentence.  The motion was seconded.  The motion was approved.

Kristy Currier, Chairperson of AA of ASMSU, moved to amend 4.2.1.11., 4.2.1.12. & 4.2.1.7. inserting at the end of the last sentences “with the exception of AA & AS of ASMSU.”

The motion was approved.

The Provost called for a vote on the amended proposed Bylaw amendments.  The Proposed Bylaws were approved!

Provost’s Remarks:
Provost Wilcox noted that as of August 2010 he will have been at MSU five Years.  One of the first meetings he had was with a group of eight representatives of faculty governance concerning the revision of Academic Bylaws.  The Provost noted his appreciation of all that he has learned in the 4 years and 9 months and thanked all of the faculty who have participated. 

Provost Wilcox also commented on the fact that we have done a good job as a campus working on and managing the challenge of reducing our operating budget.   Beginning this July, the University will be working with an operating budget that is 10% less than what it was two years ago.  This is a major change to accomplish in two years.  Everyone on campus deserves credit.

The processes for Program discontinuance continue to move forward.  There are about 33 academic programs and 13 specializations, minors and concentrations that have been recommended by one group or another for consideration for discontinuance.  There have been moratoria on student admissions moved on about half of the programs at this time.  The discussions will be resumed in the Fall.  The Provost complimented the Chairs of UGC, UCAP and UCC on the quality of their discussions on these issues.

Provost Wilcox noted that the University will be holding a very green commencement this year.  Invitations are electronic this year and the commencement robes for participants are made from recycled plastic bottles.  The commencement speaker is Joseph Kennedy III who is an international advocate for environmental issues.

ECAC Vice-Chairperson’s Remarks:
Professor Hughes reflected on how the whole process began on the revision of the Bylaws.  Some people were disturbed about the way certain actions had been taken without the involvement of faculty on campus.  As a consequence, we have looked at the Bylaws and the whole system of academic governance.  Professor Hughes acknowledged the work of the many faculty involved and noted we have all learned.    

University Committee on Curriculum Report:
Professor Good, Chairperson of UCC, reported the University Committee on Curriculum met on April 8, 2010 and presented the following report:

There were 13 program actions and 62 course proposals considered and approved which included:

  • There were 10 program changes, 1 new program and 2 discontinued programs.  The new Program is a Specialization in Sustainability and students in ANR, A&L, BUS, JM,NS, and SS may participate in the specialization.  The M.A. in Theater was discontinued, however there is still an MFA in Theater.
  • There were 3 course deletions, 37 course changes and 22 new courses approved.
  • The short UCC report lists 5 moratoria that were reviewed by UCAP on March 18 and April 1, 2010 and approved by the  Provost on March 23 and April 3, 2010.  There were 2 moratorium proposals that were not approved by the Provost.  The two items listed for discontinuation were acted on earlier by UGC and the Provost and UCC acted  upon removing the curriculum and degree requirements in this UCC report.

The UCC Report was approved as presented.

Proposed UCSA & UCFA Statement on Tolerance and Civility:
Professor Moriarty, Chairperson of UCFA, moved to accept the following UCSA and UCFA Statement on Tolerance and Civility:

“MSU strives to build an academic community with living and learning environments that expects tolerance of viewpoints and civility toward others, whether at public forums, athletic events, in residential communities, classrooms or laboratories.

We call upon all who participate in university events to promote tolerance and civil behavior and to hold themselves to high standards that reflect the university’s commitment to respect viewpoints that may be different from their own.  Only by respecting individuals with diverse perspectives and ideas can we build an environment of civility that is conducive to advancing knowledge and transforming lives.”

The motion was seconded.  Professor Moriarty noted this statement has taken a long time to be completed.  Both UCFA and UCSA have worked on the statement.  Kyle Dysarz, UCSA Chair, noted that UCSA is fully in agreement with the statement.  There was no further discussion.  The motion was approved.

Other Business:
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:20p.m.

 

 signature

Jacqueline Wright
Secretary for Academic Governance

 

Tapes of complete meetings of the Academic Council are available for review in the office of the Secretary for Academic Governance, W32 Owen Graduate Hall, 355-2337.

Committee Meeting Date: 
Tuesday, April 20, 2010 - 3:18pm
Committee Type: 
Minutes Status :