skip to main content ISU bar University Faculty Senate Approved December 07, 2006 November 30, 2006 Minutes Indiana State University Faculty Senate 2005-06 GC#10 Present: W. Barratt, M. Boyer, B. Corcoran, H. Chait, B. Frank (Senate Liaison), A. Gilberti, M. Haque, C. MacDonald, C. Mayer, L. O’Laughlin Absent: D. Collier (student rep) Ex Officio: J. Gatrell (AS), J. Kuhlman (Interim Graduate Dean), S. Powers (Ed), L. Romero (student rep), T. Siefert (SOGS) Guests: Call to Order: C. MacDonald called the meeting to order at 9:03. Agenda was adopted by consensus. Minutes for 11.16.06 were approved by consensus. C. Mayer moves approval; A. Gilberti seconds. Minutes approved unanimously [8-0-0]. Note: M. Boyer arrived after vote taken. New Business Program Development: new course proposals ARTS 651, 652 Concern expressed at the amount of time these courses have taken to go through College of Arts and Sciences. Discussion about ART 651 and a lab fee. Lab fees will support projects that might be using specialized technology and/or consumable materials (high imaging print cartridges or specialized paper, for instance). Discussion of ART 652 catalog description: there is a question as to how the course can be taken twice; appended memo clarifies this. Course proposals are approved unanimously [8-0-0] Note: M. Boyer arrived after vote taken. ELED 500W, SPED 500W, CD 500W W. Barratt moves approval; H. Chait seconds. C. Mayer calls to question, and the course proposals are approved unanimously [8-0-0]. Note: M. Boyer arrived after vote taken. Revised Graduate Faculty Status Policy Kuhlman addresses concerns of Executive Committee. First paragraph changes: new tenure-track faculty receive Graduate Faculty Status on appointment, and this allows them to serve on thesis/dissertation committees. Third paragraph changes: oversight of first year graduate faculty is explained. There is a question as to whether rules apply to new faculty coming to the university with substantial thesis/dissertation committee experience. The response is that all new faculty, even those with prior experience, should attend a workshop though they should be able to chair dissertations at least within a semester of arrival instead of waiting a year. There is a question as to who will run the workshops. They could be handled by the GC. Or another possibility is that such training could be conducted during the new faculty orientation experience, now spread across the first semester. This would ensure that all new faculty receive the training. If is suggested that if a new faculty is in a program where they will not be receiving the opportunity to chair thesis/dissertation committees, the new faculty member might not have to take the workshops. There is a question as to whether a new senior faculty member needs a mentor? The response is that they should still go through the university orientation process, which might include the workshops on thesis/dissertation committee service. The question is asked whether GC can we tell Academic Affairs to insert this orientation idea. J. Gatrell responds that New Faculty Orientation planners are open to new materials. Can a one page document with responsibilities of thesis/dissertation chairs be prepared? Yes, such a document is being developed. This is the kind of document that might be discussed in the workshop sessions. On the question of oversight and revocation of Graduate Faculty Status, text has been added to state that the Graduate Dean gives the final approval to such a move after it has been vetted by the appropriate body including at least one of the following: the relevant department committee, department chair, college dean, or Graduate Faculty committee of the GC. There is still a question as to whether further regular review is being requested by the Executive Committee. It is noted that recent Executive Committee concerns risk maintaining the original policy, thereby obviating the original charge to GC. And effective policy revision based on the original charge is sought. Executive Committee still disagrees with “for cause”. The GC’s original use of “for cause” language comes from university attorneys. A “for example” addition and reference to the as yet to be written document spelling out the responsibilities of thesis/dissertation committee chairs could be added to address this question. Regarding problems with theses/dissertations being repeatedly returned to students for correction, Dean Kuhlman will bring back a comprehensive list of thesis/dissertation revisions. Problems are both in formatting of the document to Graduate School standards and bibliographic formatting according to professional standards. Is it possible to encourage a paid outside editor? This idea is doubted. I It is noted that computer and printing technology also creates problems. It is noted that the Graduate School formatting standards need to be clarified and perhaps simplified for both students and advisors. The College of AS also has concerns with such errors. The document will be further revised and brought back for GC review. Charge from Executive Committee regarding Assistantships and Tuition Waivers W. Barratt moves to table the charge; C. Mayer seconds. Further clarification by Executive Committee is required in light of proposal revisions. Reports Chairperson’s report Schedule: GC will meet next week and not during exam week unless something pressing comes up. Schedule: a form is passed around to determine the time for next semester’s meetings. Category IV program prioritization responses: Programs agreeing to elimination need to be fast-tracked. Quite a number are in integration and reorganization category and many are well along the way in this process. We will discuss those that are contesting elimination at a later juncture. We still need a banner-carrier for the Graduate School graduation. Often the Graduate School has honored retiring faculty. Nominations are being accepted. Senate Starting next month, pay stubs will be electronic and available on the portal. On the policy of incompletes when faculty member is gone: it is the department chair ’s responsibility to assign a grade. The chair has access to the incomplete form filled out for the student. Administrative (none) Student representative New cap and gown for Masters students has been approved unanimously; the PhD cap and gown is still awaiting approval. Adjournment—10:01 Respectfully submitted, Brendan Corcoran Secretary Last modified: March 03, 2009  Copyright © 2009 by Indiana State University.