The regular monthly meeting of the Faculty Senate was called to order on March 2, 2000, at 3:01 PM, in the LaSells Stewart Center by President Gordon Matzke. Approval of the February minutes was postponed to April.
– Action Items: Academic Regulations 10 & 23 Proposed Revisions [Motion 00–555–01 through 03]
– Discussion Items: Academic Regulations 17, 18 & 19; Final Exam Schedules; and Difference, Power and Discrimination Task Force Report (Motion 00–555–04)
– New Business: None
Members Absent Without Representation:
Abbott, Ahern, Arp, Barth, Beatty, Bliss, Bontrager, Braker, Breen, Bruce, Clinton, Cloughesy, Collier, Cromack, Daniels, deGeus, Doescher, Downing, Esbensen, Gamroth, Gardner, Green, Henthorne, Jepson, Kerkvliet, Krause, Mallory–Smith, Merickel, Mix, Murphy, Reed, Samelson, Stang, Strik, Trehu, J. White, Witters, and Yim.
Faculty Senate Officers, Ex–Officios and Staff Present:
G. Matzke, President; H. Sayre, President–Elect; K. Williamson, Immediate Past President; R. Iltis, Parliamentarian; Ex–officio's: S. Coakley and M. Spraggins; and V. Nunnemaker, Senate Staff.
Guests of the Senate:
B. Balz, I. Delson, S. Francis, C. Jones, J. Kerkvliet, A. Torres, and T. Wilcox.
Joe Kerkvliet, Academic Regulations Chair, presented proposed changes to Academic Regulations
10 and 23. (Note: Proposed additions are in bold and proposed deletions are in brackets.)
AR 10. Eligibility
[b. For participation in intercollegiate athletics, students must meet all institutional, Pacific 10 Conference, nd NCAA requirements. There are many rules that govern the eligibility of students, including those pertaining to amateurism, financial aid limitations, ethical conduct, participation in "outside" competition, and academics. The main academic rules are:
1) Initial eligibility. A high school graduate must have at the time of graduation presented an accumulative six, seven, or eight semesters' minimum grade point average of 2.00 as certified on the high school transcript. Students using GED tests in lieu of a high school diploma and all transfer students should consult with the Department of Intercollegiate Athletics for determination of eligibility, because eligibility rules are too detailed to be presented here.
2) Satisfactory Progress Toward a Degree. Eligibility for regular season competition after the first year in residence or after the student has used one season of eligibility in any sport shall be determined at the beginning of the fall term of the regular academic year, based upon: (a) satisfactory completion prior to each fall term of a total number of quarter credits of academic work acceptable toward a baccalaureate degree in a designated program of studies equivalent to an average of at least 12 quarter credits during each of the previous quarters in academic years in which the student was enrolled, or (b) satisfactory completion of 36 quarter credits acceptable toward a baccalaureate degree in a designated program of studies, since the beginning of the previous fall term. A student–athlete shall designate a program of studies leading toward a specific baccalaureate degree no later than the beginning of the seventh quarter of enrollment.
3) Enrollment During Season of Competition. At the time of practice or competition, the student must be registered for not less than 12 semester or quarter credits. In the case of sports that begin competition prior to the beginning of classes, a student must have been admitted as a regularly matriculated, degree–seeking student in accordance with the regular, published entrance requirements.
Waivers of some eligibility rules are possible. Students should consult the Department of Intercollegiate Athletics on all such matters.]
b. For participation in intercollegiate athletics, students must meet all institutional, PAC–10 and NCAA requirements. Students should contact the Compliance Office in the Department of Intercollegiate Athletics on all such matters.
Kerkvliet explained that the committee learned that the proposed deletions were, in many cases, incomplete or obsolete. He noted that one section under consideration for deletion referring to waivers applied to extra–curricular activities.
Senator Landau, Science, moved to accept the proposed revisions to AR 10; motion seconded. Motion 00–555–01 to approve passed by voice vote with no dissenting votes.
AR 23. Special Examination For Credit
A regularly enrolled student in good standing, either graduate or undergraduate, currently registered at Oregon State University [during fall, winter, or spring quarter] and wishing credit for an OSU course for which a grade has not been previously received, may petition for credit examination under the following conditions:
a. The application for such examination shall be presented on an Official Student Petition and shall bear the [recommendations] approvals of the dean of the student's college, the dean of the college in which the course is offered, and head of the department in which the course is offered.
[d. No student may take a special examination for credit in the term in which he or she completes requirements for graduation.]
d. No examination for credit will be approved for a course in which the student is currently enrolled later than the end of the official add/drop period for the term.
Someone questioned whether the body should consider limiting the number of credits obtained by examination.
Senator Tynon, Forestry, felt that the proposed wording in Section d. was confusing and proposed an amendment to read: After the end of the official add/drop period for the term, no examination for credit will be approved for a course in which the student is currently enrolled. Motion 00–555–02 was seconded.
Following additional discussion regarding proposed wording, Senator Lunch, Liberal Arts, moved to recommit to committee AR 23 and clarify the points discussed; motion seconded. Motion 00–555–03 passed by voice vote with some dissenting votes.
Joe Kerkvliet, Academic Regulations Chair, presented proposed revisions to Academic Regulations 17, 18 and 19 for discussion. He noted that, since the Committee was requested to consider adding an A+ grade by both faculty and students, input and guidance from the Senate to determine how to proceed would be appreciated. (Note: Proposed additions are in bold.)
AR 17. Grades
The grading system consists of twelve basic grades, A+, A, A–, B+, B, B–, C+, C, C–, D+, D, D–, and F.
AR 18. Alternative Grading Systems
3) A grade of S (satisfactory) shall be equivalent to grades A+, A, A–, B+, B, B–, C+, C, C–.
AR 19. Grade Points
Grade points are computed on the basis of 4 points for each credit of A+ or A grade, ...
Kerkvliet confirmed for Senator Obermiller, Agricultural Sciences, that the U of O grants a 4.3 GPA for an A+. When questioned by Senator Woods, Engineering, why a 4.3 should not be given, Kerkvliet related three arguments: 1) GPA's are all relative; 2) It would lower the GPA for students who do not get an A+; and 3) It would create additional numerical calculations which would necessitate changing financial aid and scholarship requirements.
ASOSU Student Advocate Greg Evans presented research regarding GPA inflation and deflation which indicated there was no significant difference when A+ is added.
ASOSU President Melanie Spraggins noted that the request originated with ASOSU to make the grade scales comparable at both the U of O and OSU.
Senator Lee, Liberal Arts, questioned whether OSU's scale is in the minority. ASOSU Advocate Evans reported that there is a trend across the country to add an A+ to the grading scale. He noted that Berkeley, Stanford and the U of O have 4.3 GPA's in the PAC–10.
Senator Brooks, Business, felt that an A+ must be a 4.3 or the GPA is compromised. Senator Shor, Engineering, felt that the highest GPA should remain at 4.0 and an A+ should be for only truly exceptional students.
President–Elect Sayre related problems experienced at the U of O where faculty are pressured by students to receive an A+.
Senator Landau suggested that an admission be made that an A+ is grade inflation and use it to make OSU students more competitive.
Final Exam Schedules
Barbara Balz, Registrar, discussed the issue of adding a half hour between each scheduled final exam. This discussion was the result of a request at the December Senate meeting.
Balz explained that final exams are currently scheduled continuously from 7:30 AM to 9:50 PM Monday through Thursday and from 7:30 to 11:20 AM on Friday. Friday afternoon of Finals Week is left open to schedule special exams and resolve conflicts with other exams. The schedule allows time for 22 regular exams and eight group exams. When compared to the final exam schedule at the U of O, their exams begin at 8:00 AM and end at 10:00 PM Monday through Thursday and from 8:00 AM to 12:15 on Friday. Their schedule allows 22 regular exams and 3 group exams. The U of O exams are 2 hours in length vs. OSU's 1 hour and fifty minutes and the U of O has 15 minutes between exams vs. OSU's 10 minutes. The real difference comes down to the number of group exams scheduled. Balz determined that both institutions offer about 45 group exams, but OSU allots five additional group exam periods to accommodate courses in Engineering, Accounting, and Sciences.
Balz presented two additional exam scenarios:
1) A 30 minute passing time Monday through Thursday would require exams to begin at 7:30 AM and end at 11:20 PM; and
2) A 20 minute passing time Monday through Thursday would require exams to begin at 7:30 AM and end at 10:40 PM.
Senator Brooks noted that 31 exam sessions would be available if exams ended at 10:00 PM on Friday. His calculations from the schedule represented 37 group exams. He presented an alternate exam schedule consisting of a 30 minute passing time, allowing time for both lunch and dinner, with six sessions each day Monday through Friday beginning at 7:30 AM and ending at 10:00 PM.
Senator Folts, Liberal Arts, felt this would be an enormous grading task for hand–graded exams if the schedule extended into Friday afternoon or evening. IFS Senator Torres suggested determining Friday exams based on whether or not they are essay or multiple choice.
Senator Nishihara, Student Affairs, noted that residence halls close at 5:00 PM on Friday.
Senator King, Business, felt that students should be consulted to determine their stand on the issue.
Senator Coblentz, Agricultural Sciences, questioned whether changing the schedule would benefit the students or faculty and whether the proportion of students having back–to–back finals was known (it wasn't known).
In response to Ex–Officio Coakley's question of whether the same rotational schedule is followed each term, Balz stated that the schedule changes each term.
Senator Wrolstad, Agricultural Sciences, felt that an alternate proposal should be considered, but that it needed evaluation to determine if it is workable. Balz noted that the issue is whether group exams could be reduced or consolidated and if Friday afternoon would be acceptable to schedule exams.
Senator Lunch, Liberal Arts, moved to refer the issue to either the Academic Regulations Committee or the Advancement of Teaching Committee; motion seconded. Motion 00–555–04 to refer the issue to committee passed by voice vote with no dissenting votes.
Difference, Power and Discrimination Task Force
Alexis Walker, Difference, Power and Discrimination (DPD) Task Force Chair, explained that the group has been meeting weekly since August. The group was told that two major concerns to address were a general lack of clarity about some aspects of the criteria and that the DPD Program didn't seem to be well integrated across the University. She requested input from the Senate on the two following draft documents.
– Faculty Awards Deadline – March 6 is the deadline for submitting nominations for awards selected by the Faculty Recognition and Awards Committee
– Fireside Chat – President Risser invites staff and faculty to share ideas, ask questions, and engage in lively conversation about OSU on April 11, from 3:00–4:30 in the MU Lounge.
– Committee Interest Forms – Forms indicating preferences to serve on University and Faculty Senate committees are due in the Faculty Senate Office in early April.
– Joint Meeting – The joint AAUP, AOF, IFS meeting will be held on April 29 on the OSU campus.
Interim Provost White congratulated the College of Liberal Arts, Department of Political Science, and others
involved in sponsoring the McCall Lecture held the previous night. He felt that it was a class event which brought
in an engaging speaker, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
Staff Fee Policy – White requested input on OUS recommendations regarding the proposed Staff Fee Policy, of which the Chancellor is supportive. The President at each institution would determine whether programs on their campus would be participating. The following has been agreed to:
Employees would be allowed to take courses at $20 per credit.
Limited to 10 credits per term. Allowing employees to transfer their allotted credits to a dependent attending either the employee's place of work or another OUS campus. Other State agencies might feel that Higher Education employees are receiving an additional benefit. This benefit may work against Higher Education in the Legislature in salary distribution conversations.
President Matzke thanked Joe Kerkvliet and Alexis Walker for the effort their committees have put forth.
A task force has been formed to determine if there are alternatives that could boost the size of salary increases at OSU in the future.
Matzke expressed disappointment that budget figures for next year are still not yet available. This puts departments in the uncertain position of trying to determine whether to make commitments to graduate students and new hires while not knowing whether resources will be available.
Matzke noted that the Sizemore initiative looms on the horizon and encouraged faculty to work to promote the role of higher education in the State in an effort to educate the public.
There was no new business
Meeting was adjourned at 4:55 PM.
Faculty Senate Administrative Assistant