skip page navigationOregon State University
OSU Home.|Calendar.|Find Someone.|Maps.|Site Index.

Faculty Senate

Faculty Senate » December 7, 2000

Faculty Senate Minutes

2000 No. 561
December 7, 2000
 

For All Faculty

The regular monthly meeting of the Faculty Senate was called to order on December 7, 2000, at 3:00 PM, in the LaSells Stewart Center by President Gordon Matzke. There were no corrections to the minutes of November 2000.


Meeting Summary

– Election Report: Process Update

– Action Items: Executive Committee Election; Category I Proposals: Master of Fine Arts Degree in Creative Writing, Merging and Renaming the Oregon Water Resources Research Institute and the Center for the Analysis of Environmental Change, and Rename the Center for Salmon Disease Research to the Center for Fish Disease Research; Standing Rules changes to the Committee on Committees and Diversity Council; and Revisions to Academic Regulations 1 and 2 [Motion 00–561–01 through 11]

– Discussion Item: College of Veterinary Medicine

– Special Report: Interinstitutional Faculty Senate

– New Business: None


Roll Call

Members Absent With Representation:
Avery, J. Anamaet; Beeson, J. Schindler; Butler, T. Deboodt; Lunch, A. Jeydel; Mallory-Smith, O Riera-Lizarazu; and Schwab, D. Loeffler.

Members Absent Without Representation:
Ahern, Braker, Brooks, Bruce, Carson, Christensen, Cloughesy, Collier, Collins, Cromack, Daniels, DeCarolis, deGeus, Downing, Freitag, Gamroth, Green, Gregory, Hamm, Henthorne, Hooker, Horne, Huber, Jepson, Jimmerson, Kerkvliet, Kimerling, Lomax, McDaniel, Murphy, Obermiller, Schori, Stang, Strik, Trehu, Vickers, J. White, Winner, Witters, and Woods.

Faculty Senate Officers, Ex-Officios and Staff Present:
G. Matzke, President; H. Sayre, President-Elect; K. Williamson, Immediate Past President; S. Coakley and T. White, Ex-Officios; R. Iltis, Parliamentarian; and V. Nunnemaker, Senate Staff.

Guests of the Senate:
B. Balz, R. Banning, L. Burns, F. Conway, I. Delson, V. Djolcotoe, L. Friedman, R. Schwartz, and T. Daugherty.


ELECTION REPORT

Faculty Senate Election Process Update

President Matzke explained that, since the College of Liberal Arts did not receive ballots for the President-Elect and Interinstitutional Faculty Senate Senator election, the deadline for returning ballots has been extended to January 17.


ACTION ITEMS

Executive Committee

Executive Committee candidates were: Dan Arp, Mary Cluskey, Paul Doescher, Kimberly Douglas, Jonathan King, Mary Prucha and Steve Tesch.

Ballots were distributed and counted during the meeting. Those elected to two-year terms were: Dan Arp (Professor of Botany and Plant Pathology and Director, Molecular and Cellular Biology Graduate Program), Paul Doescher (Professor of Rangeland Resources), and Mary Prucha (Professional Faculty, Coordinator of Graduate Services, Graduate School).

The newly elected Executive Committee members will join the continuing members: Vicki Tolar Burton, Stella Coakley and Rubin Landau.


Category | Proposals

Len Friedman, Curriculum Council Chair, presented three Category I proposals for approval.

Master of Fine Arts Degree in Creative Writing
The proposal can be found on the web at: http://osu.orst.edu/dept/academic/aa/curric/cat1s/MFA.htm

There was no discussion on the proposal. Motion 00-561-01 passed by voice vote with no dissenting votes.

Merging the Oregon Water Resources Institute (OWRRI) and the Center for the Analysis of Environmental Change (CAEC) and renaming it the Center for Water and Environmental Sustainability (CWESt)
The proposal can be found on the web at: http://osu.orst.edu/ dept/academic/aa/curric/cat1s/CWest.htm

Motion 00-561-02 passed by voice vote with no dissenting votes.

Rename the Center for Salmon Disease Research to the Center for Fish Disease Research
The proposal can be found on the web at: http://osu.orst.edu/dept/academic/aa/curric/cat1s/fishrename.htm

Motion 00-561-03 passed by voice vote with no dissenting votes.


Standing Rules Changes

Flaxen Conway, Committee on Committees Chair, presented for approval Standing Rules revisions to the Committee on Committees and new Standing Rules for a Diversity Council.

Committee on Committees

(Note: Proposed additions are indicated in bold)

The Committee is composed of six Faculty and the ASOSU Executive Director of Committees.

The student member was eliminated from the committee several years ago, but is now being added since it was discovered that the ASOSU Bylaws indicate that the proposed member shall be a member of the committee.

Motion 00-561-04 was approved by voice vote with no dissenting votes.

Diversity Council

(Note: The following Standing Rules are being proposed in their entirety)

The Diversity Council provides a forum for communications among campus groups participating in OSU's diversity related activities. It promotes, stimulates, and develops strategies for improving community-wide diversity as authorized by the OSU Faculty Senate and endorsed by the OSU Administration. The Diversity Council will proactively help the campus move toward a more diverse university. It considers and evaluates diversity efforts of the university community and recommends the introduction of new programs and special events, or changes to existing ones, to better meet the University's diversity goals. It facilitates faculty and staff development efforts relating to diversity issues. Immediate crisis response is not a function of the Council, but it may evaluate the effectiveness of crisis responses, as it relates to University diversity goals.

The Diversity Council reports directly to the Faculty Senate. It prepares an annual report comparing the University's efforts and impacts with the OSU Mission and Goals and similar efforts of other institutions of higher education.

The Council consists of one voting representative from each group involved or interested in diversity efforts at OSU. Meetings are always open. A majority of the Council members shall constitute a quorum. The Faculty Senate President shall appoint the Council Chairperson. The Council's day to day activities and responsibilities including, yet not limited to, reviewing activities, proposing actions, and drafting reports shall be the responsibility of the Diversity Council Coordinating Committee. The Coordinating Committee shall consist of two members appointed by the Diversity Council and two members appointed by the Faculty Senate President. Those appointees shall appoint two student members and one community member. The Diversity Council shall meet at least quarterly, and the Coordinating Committee shall meet as frequently as required to assure the continuity and responsiveness of the Council.

In response to Leslie Burns, Undergraduate Academic Programs, questioning the composition of the Council, President Matzke explained that the thought was that it would include those groups (about 25) and individuals who feel they are involved in diversity on campus. Matzke noted that this Council was in response to the TEAM Report asking the University to do more in the diversity area.

Immediate Past President Ken Williamson noted that he had initially proposed the notion of the Council and the idea was to model it after the Academic Advising Council whose membership consists of non-designated units that provide academic advising to students. Since the feeling was that the existing diversity groups were not communicating effectively, the Council creation was the Faculty Senate's response to create better communication. President Risser is committed to preparing a diversity progress report every year and this Council would assist in the preparation.

Senator Nishihara, Student Affairs, questioned why the chair would be appointed by the Senate rather than the group, as occurs with the Academic Advising Council. Williamson noted that, since the report will represent the Faculty Senate, it was felt that they should be appointed by that group.

Senator Coblentz, Agricultural Sciences, felt that the groups should be defined.

Senator Tiedeman, Liberal Arts, questioned the intent of the second sentence of the first paragraph and moved to amend it by ending the sentence after ‘community-wide diversity’ and deleting the remainder of the sentence. Motion 00-561-06 to truncate the second sentence was seconded and passed by voice vote.

Senator Cornell moved to amend the document by inserting the word ‘recognized’ in the first sentence of the first paragraph so it would read ‘...among recognized campus groups...’ Motion 00-561-07 was defeated by voice vote with no votes in support.

President-Elect Sayre moved to amend the document to insert the word ‘recognized’ in the first sentence of the third paragraph so it would read ‘...from each recognized group involved or interested...’ and to add ‘as determined by the Diversity Council coordinating committee’ at the end of the first sentence of the third paragraph. Motion 00-561-08 was seconded.

Senator Cornell amended the amendment to delete ‘as determined by the Diversity Council coordinating committee’ and add the word ‘campus’ in the first sentence of the third paragraph so it would read ‘...from each recognized campus group involved or interested...’ Motion seconded. Motion 00-561-09 to amend the amendment passed by voice vote with no dissenting votes.

Motion 00-561-08 to amend per Sayre passed by voice vote with no dissenting votes. The first sentence of the third paragraph now reads, ‘The Council consists of one voting representative from each recognized campus group involved or interested in diversity efforts at OSU.'

Motion 00-561-05 to approve the proposed Diversity Council Standing Rules, as amended, passed by voice vote with no dissenting votes.


Revisions to Academic Regulations 1 and 2

Peter Nelson, Academic Regulations Committee member, presented proposed revisions to Academic Regulations 1 and 2. Nelson explained that the existing AR1 is obsolete. The reason behind replacing it with another, unrelated, Academic Regulation is to maintain the numerical sequence of the remaining AR's.

(Note: AR1. Regular Standing for Special Students, in its entirety, is proposed to be deleted)

AR 1. Regular Standing For Special Students
a. A person who qualifies for admission as an undergraduate but who elected status as a special student or was entered as a special student because of being a high school student may obtain regular standing by satisfying all admission regulations and procedures.

b. A person who entered as a special undergraduate student because of a scholastic deficiency may obtain regular standing and clear his or her deficiency by satisfying the following conditions:
1. Completion of no fewer than 36 term credits of residence at OSU with a grade point average of not less than 2.00.

2. Completion of examination or requirements as may be prescribed by the dean of the college concerned.

3. Written endorsement to the Academic Requirements Committee by the office of the dean of the college in which the student wishes to register as a degree candidate.
c. The special student category may be used by those holders of a baccalaureate degree who (1) do not wish to pursue an advanced degree or (2) have not met the requirements for admission to the Graduate School.
Special students may be considered for status as regular graduate students at any time, except for those who have previously applied and failed to meet the requirements for admission to graduate school. A student who has failed to meet the requirements for admission to the Graduate School must complete 24 credits of graduate work with a grade of A or B in each course prior to being reconsidered for admission as a regular graduate student.

A maximum of 15 credits of graduate work earned as a special student may be used to fulfill requirements for an advanced degree if the work meets with the approval of the student's graduate committee. Credits earned as a special student cannot be used to meet residence requirements.

(Note: The proposal calls for AR1 to be replaced with the following Academic Regulation)

AR1 Admission for Non-Degree Students
a. Non-degree enrollment status for undergraduate students is designed for students who wish to take 8 or fewer credits per term, but do not wish to pursue a degree or a specific post-baccalaureate credential.

b. Non-degree enrollment status for graduate students is designed for student(s) who wish to take graduate courses, but do not wish to pursue an advanced degree. Non-degree graduate students are not limited as to the number of courses (credits) per term.

c. Credits earned as a non-degree undergraduate student may be used to satisfy degree requirements upon admission as a degree-seeking student.

d. Credits earned while enrolled as a non-degree graduate student will not necessarily apply to a graduate program upon admission to degree-seeking status. The student should refer to the admission requirements given in the Graduate Catalog. Communication with the Graduate School and specific academic programs is advised.

e. Non-degree students seeking admission to a degree program may do so by filing an undergraduate, post- baccalaureate, or graduate application for admission.
Senator Rosenberger, Liberal Arts, questioned the rationale of limiting undergraduate students to eight credits when graduate students are allowed more. Barbara Balz, Registrar, noted that this is an OUS policy.

Motion 00-561-10 to delete the existing AR1 and replace it with the proposed AR1 passed by voice vote with no dissenting votes.

AR2. Credit from a Two-Year Institution
(Undergraduate Students)

(Note: Proposed additions are shown in bold and proposed deletions are indicated in brackets)
a. College Transfer Credits: Oregon State University accepts for credit toward a baccalaureate degree all college transfer work completed at an Oregon or other accredited community college up to 108 lower- division credits. Transfer credits and grades are not used in calculating the OSU cumulative GPA. Students who hold OSU-approved direct transfer degrees from Oregon or other accredited community colleges (e.g., the Associate of Arts Oregon Transfer degree), [or other transfer degrees], or who have 90 or more credits accepted in transfer will be granted junior standing.1 Students who [have received Associate of Arts Oregon Transfer degrees from Oregon community colleges], hold OSU-approved direct transfer degrees will be considered to have met the Perspectives and Skills (except WIC) areas of the Baccalaureate Core; see AR25. In addition, they must complete the upper division Synthesis and WIC areas of the Core. Students transferring from Oregon or other accredited community colleges [approved institutions of higher education without Oregon Transfer] who do not hold approved direct transfer degrees [ordinarily] will be given Baccalaureate Core credit in the Perspectives and Skills areas on a course-by-course basis for work that is judged to be equivalent in content.

1 Such standing does not necessarily imply that OSU institutional, college, or division, and departmental requirements, normally satisfied by OSU students prior to their junior year, have been satisfied.
Senator Shaw, Liberal Arts, questioned the effect on WIC and DPD courses. Nelson indicated that, if this AR is approved, then a proposal to change AR25 will be presented and depending on the wording, AR2 may also need to be modified. He noted that AR2 is currently in compliance with the Baccalaureate Core.

Senator Gross, Liberal Arts, noted that not all courses at the community college level have been taught as DPD courses.

Motion 00-561-11 to approve the changes to AR2 passed by voice vote with no dissenting votes.


DISCUSSION ITEM

College of Veterinary Medicine

Dean L.J. Koong provided a brief history of the College of Veterinary Medicine as background for discussing the need for a four-year small animal program. He noted that he was asked by President Risser and, then Provost, Roy Arnold to obtain approval of a four-year program. Koong appointed a committee to prepare the proposal, but was notified in July by Provost White that the Chancellor had decided against including it in his proposal. Koong stated that the College has support from many agricultural and farm entities across the State.

The reason behind a four-year program includes, academic integrity, faculty welfare, and student welfare.

Academic Integrity - Veterinary Medicine is the only unit in OUS which must sublet a required program from another institution (Washington State University). This creates problems with academic integrity when WSU decides to change their curriculum and OSU has no voice in the matter.

Faculty Welfare - There are 32 tenure-track faculty in two departments with a 24-hour large animal hospital and diagnostic lab available to all veterinarians in the State. These numbers allow no depth when the two anesthesiologists are each on call six months of the year.

Student Welfare - The students (average age is 26, with 75% of the class typically female) are required to move twice during their academic career at OSU in order to receive required courses. The national average student debt at graduation is $50,000 as compared to $70,000 for Veterinary Medicine students.

Koong noted that the College is isolated and the student body is not integrated into the University, but he is changing that. He asked to speak to the Senate to let faculty on campus know what is happening in the College.

Senator Douglas, Engineering, questioned whether there were retention issues with those students going to WSU. Koong responded that retention is not an issue since acceptance is very competitive and it is very difficult to transfer to another, similar program. The OSU Veterinary Medicine program receives over 100 applications each year and only 36 are accepted, with 28 of those from in-state and 8 from out-of-state WICHE students. Koong noted that it is very difficult to attract out-of-state students because of the move back and forth to WSU.

Senator Thies, Science, questioned what four-year approval would mean and how much is currently being paid to WSU. Koong explained that WSU receives about $2 million per year (adjusted yearly for inflation) with Veterinary Medicine paying $1.3 million to WSU to train 72 students per year, and the students paying tuition to WSU on top of that amount. The proposal seeks an additional $8 million base funding for the biennium allocated to the small animal training component. The first two years would not require program funding and the $8 million would be used to build a small animal clinic on campus.

Koong ended his presentation by stating that he is sincere about communicating Veterinary Medicine issues and it would be important to him to receive an endorsement from the Faculty Senate for a four-year program.


SPECIAL REPORTS

Interinstitutional Faculty Senate

Senator Gary Tiedeman recapped his last year as Interinstitutional Faculty Senate (IFS) President with a report to the Senate.

Tiedeman noted that each OUS institution has representation on the IFS for a total of 20 Senators which meet every two months at a different institution. He explained the IFS format as a governance vehicle for sharing and comparing campus circumstances and experiences, for discussing issues of common concern and for formulating positions, reactions and initiatives for conveyance to appropriate recipients and audiences. Each meeting they typically hear from the host institution President or Provost, legislators, and OSBHE members.

The IFS President makes monthly reports to the OSBHE regarding topics of concern. The IFS legislative agenda during the past year included: the establishment of a Scholars Network to provide expert advisement to legislators upon request; faculty diversity proposals (not incorporated into the Chancellor's budget proposal); and a modest request for central funding for IFS support services (which was included in the Chancellor's budget proposal). Topics also receiving considerable discussion included: distance education (its promises and perils); a current proposal to revise the Board's role in hearing faculty grievance cases that rise beyond the campus level; pros and cons of a Bend campus; a prospective plan to substitute a fully credit-based student tuition system for the current system that allows in excess of 12 hours at the 12 hour rate (IFS formally opposed this proposal); the new budget model, in particular the call for autonomy and entrepreneurship and the desirability for a continued OUS cohesiveness; combating the view of higher education as fundamentally there to serve ‘work force needs’ -- attempting to distinguish between education and training; a reduced tuition option for faculty and staff dependents; and the return of semester conversion. IFS will be discussing semester conversion in February and Tiedeman encouraged faculty to contact him or Bruce Sorte with their comments on the issue.

Tiedeman thanked the Senate for the privilege of letting him represent OSU, Provost White and former Provost Arnold for their support in allowing him to take on the IFS Presidency and Vickie Nunnemaker for her assistance.

Senator Landau, Science, questioned whether there were ways in which the OSU Senate could work more closely with IFS to promote faculty goals. Tiedeman responded that PSU has incorporated one of their IFS Senators as a member on their equivalent of our Executive Committee and a suggestion will be made to all campuses to do the same to ensure two-way communication.


INFORMATION ITEMS

Graduate Admissions Task Force

John Westall, Graduate Admissions Task Force Chair, explained that the Task Force was created as a result of the Graduate School Review which highlighted some issues with Graduate Admissions. Sally Francis, Graduate School Interim Dean, and Bob Bontrager, Admission and Orientation Director, commissioned the Task Force.

The charge includes increasing the efficiency for everyone concerned with graduate admissions and increasing the effectiveness of the various academic units in meeting their graduate recruiting goals. The objective is to come up with a graduate admissions process that gives OSU an advantage in recruitment of top-tier graduate students.

Open meetings to discuss the issue will occur on January 16 and 17. The report is due on March 1 and tentative implementation is scheduled for fall 2001.

Major issues in the report include:

1) From the academic side, departments need:
a) to recognize the great diversity of different programs
b) a rapid response to the admissions process, and
c) a rapid communication of all kinds of appeals.
2) On the Administrative side:
a) an efficient process is needed, and
b) concurrence with State laws is needed to maintain records and processing paperwork in an efficient manner.
Westall urged everyone in a unit with a graduate program to encourage colleagues interested in graduate admissions to attend the open meetings or e-mail him with concerns.

– Faculty Senate Reception - All Senators are invited to a reception at President and Mrs. Risser's home following the December Senate meeting.

– Faculty Senate Committee/Council Annual Reports, 1999-00 - Annual Reports can be found on the web at: http://osu.orst.edu/dept/senate/comm.htm. Please note that the University Honors College Council Annual Report was incorrectly listed as not received.

– NCAA Certification Public Meetings - In preparation for a February NCAA site visit to certify the Athletics program, a public meeting will be held December 7 to describe the results of the self-study and obtain feedback from the community.

– Martin Luther King, Jr. Teach-in - Copies of the teach-in guide can be obtained from the Office of Multicultural Affairs.

– Central Oregon RFP - The Central Oregon RFP is available in the Valley Library Reserve Section and at http://www.cosu.orst.edu/


REPORT FROM & DIALOG WITH THE PROVOST

Provost Tim White began his report by thanking Gary Tiedeman for his remarkably capable, effective, and uncannily engaging representation of the faculty.

His report also included the following items:

Central Oregon - White noted that many individuals have been working on the proposal, but acknowledged four in particular for their efforts in the production and communication side of the endeavor: Sandie Franklin, Tina Chavonec, Dave Stauth and Mark Floyd.

He explained that the OSU proposal is an advanced model for higher education and that there are profound differences between the OSU and U of O proposals, such as: the OSU proposal has a core of Liberal Arts and Sciences, as well as professional degree programs; it calls for residential faculty in Bend; it is an efficiency of intellectual activity; and there is a central core rather than a series of traditional departments. The savings realized from the central core allows OSU to offer 22 degrees as opposed to 3 degrees proposed by the U of O.

White felt that OSU's experience with the Promotion and Tenure system and the fact that OSU already has experience with faculty off-campus gives the proposal added authenticity and credibility. Additionally, OSU has a track record of working with many community colleges in Oregon. OSU also has a long history, since 1911, of profound programs in Central Oregon.

Administrative Searches - Dean candidates for Veterinary Medicine and Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences will be on campus in January - White encouraged faculty participation in the open forums.

Sabah Randhawa from the College of Engineering has been appointed Vice Provost for Academic Affairs to replace Andy Hashimoto. White indicated that he was grateful to all who applied.

Cultural Centers - After recently visiting the Cultural Centers, White resolved to create a document that provides a commitment to the Cultural Centers as a vital entity of OSU and that, if the need arises to relocate or expand a Center, they will be full participants in those decisions. He recognizes the importance of the Centers to recruitment and retention of students and faculty and recognizes the need to embrace the Centers in much more profound and sustainable ways than in the past.

White indicated that the document, tentatively scheduled for completion by the end of January, will be circulated for public comment and he encouraged faculty to participate.

Budget - The Governor's initial budget has been released and doesn't appear to be particularly supportive of higher education. If approved as proposed, it's clear that the cell funding values would be reduced, it doesn't deal with faculty salaries, it greatly reduces money from state-wide programs, it funds Engineering at 50% of what was finally negotiated, and it eliminates a $2.8 million subsidy for Pharmacy and Veterinary Medicine students. The proposed budget will be shared with the Faculty Economic Welfare and Retirement Committee for their review. The administration is working on a thoughtful way to move forward in the budget area.

REPORT FROM & DIALOG WITH THE FACULTY SENATE PRESIDENT

President Matzke's report included the following items:

– Thanks to the outgoing Senators for their service.

– Issue Group on Intellectual Property and Distance Education - This group has begun meeting and is chaired by Dick Schori.

– There has not yet been agreement to appoint a group to study professional faculty issues.

NEW BUSINESS

There was no new business


Meeting was adjourned at 4:56 PM.

Respectfully submitted:

Vickie Nunnemaker
Faculty Senate Administrative Assistant