Welcome to the seventh of March, 2016 Faculty Senate meeting. We have a lot of items to cover today. So gosh, it's it's not working, but anyway, so so that we'll have to look back. >> Okay. >> Sorry. >> So what did it what we're seeing here on an undecided, here's my first slide. So what we'll do is do I your emotion to adopt the agenda. I hear about motion from a brine. >> Again. Are we being asked to ask to move them on the double counting of credits to later in the agenda so that we can discuss it later. >> Right. So we'll move it from Geiger a second. >> Okay. >> All all in favor follows boat on the acceptance in the agenda that post and a second, sorry, Holland favor, things will go like this. So the next item on the agenda is to approve the minutes. Do I have a motion to approve the minutes, fellow second. All in favor? And so we'll move to remarks by Provost grotto. >> Thanks, Bob. >> Will my remarks short? I just want to update you on a few things and then I'll open it up for any questions that you might have. >> First, we reese recently launched the EAB students as success collaborative. >> That's the Educational Advisory Board, success collaborative. It's a program where we can track students and make sure that they are on track for graduation. Look at their transcripts, look at their progress, and bring them in and advise them that we can better help them to complete their degree requirements in a timely fashion. >> This has been successful a lot of other schools. >> This is our first launch. >> We dedicate a lot of resources to this and we hope that's going to help our students be more successful here. >> The second thing, just this morning, I charged a coalition for Mental Health to do a study of our mental health on campus here to get an assessment of where we stand across a variety of different dimensions. And it come forward with recommendations for how we can help our students be more successful here in a healthy environment. Just to give you a sense of how important this is. >> In 201333 thousand students were polled nationally. And of those students, 84.4% said they were overwhelm. >> 59.5 said they were very sad. 51% said that they felt overwhelming anxiety. And 44.7% said that they felt hopeless all within the last six months. So this is a national epidemic and I wanted to make sure that we get our hands around this. Charles Beale is going to be chairing that and they will be delivery interim reports and have a final report within a year. Another very successful activity that we launched this past year is something that started with a unit del, a proposal and eventually a grant that was led by Don Thompson, vice president for student life. And this is something that's called proband now and Perkins lie and are events that happen on the weekend, Friday, and Saturday night that are alcohol free. And it's late-night programming. And it brings students in for a variety of things, from comedy shows to dancing, to concerts. Almost 3 thousand students have attended over the first end duns. >> Here at the end, I want to give her a round of applause because it's a brilliant idea. >> Over 3 thousand students have attended over the course of last semester. This part of this came out of the Coalition for alcohol and drug abuse and looking for alternatives for our students. Here, 84% of the respondents and done did a wonderful job of assessing this, not just launching, is 84% of respondents. >> Respondents said that participating in these events helped them feel like part of UD, part of the UD campus community. >> 69% said that during the events they had conversations with people from, from cultural backgrounds different than their own. >> So there's a wonderful multicultural event. >> 79% of respondents said that the programming enabled them to identify other campus activities to attend where alcohol is not served. 66% of the respondents said that the probing programming helped them identify student organizations to join. >> And these are just two quotes. >> It was refreshing to see the university invest in having these alcohol-free events that are actually fun and worthwhile to go. I love being around other students in a safe environment without alcohol. So that's a, a wonderful initiative that Don undertook and I want to give her around them tomorrow. >> We have finally, after a long wait, the nano fab grand opening. And it will start with a lecture by Cornell University's Harold Craig head will deliver a talk in Michel Hall at 3pm entitled nanofabrication and Biosystems. >> And he is the former director of the National nano fab facility in Cornell and the founding director of Cornell's nano, nano biotechnology center. After his lecture, there'll be a ribbon cutting at, at Harker Hi slab and a reception from four to six PM. I would encourage all of you to attend. >> And my final note, a rather sad note, two of our colleagues were injured in the past few days. Jeff Hines, as many of you know, who's a professor of linguistics and cognitive science, was involved in that tragic accident on Delaware Avenue. >> He's he was in I visited him in the hospital on Friday at Christiana. He's had multiple fractures whose two cars that collided, one flipped over. >> Hit him. He was walking down the sidewalk and it was just some tragic acts and the other just happened over the weekend. >> Jack partly who's Professor of Biology and the former director of the a program and the director of the Delaware Teaching Institute was injured in a skiing accident, Vermont, and is now in Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center in Hanover, New Hampshire. And he's going to have some surgery tomorrow, but it's going to be a little bit of a road to recovery. So if you if you know them and even if you don't, I think that they would love to get a a an e-mail or some something just like now that you're thinking about. So with that, I'd like to open it up to any questions or would you move straight into your packed agenda? Oh, yes. >> Maria claim that glass? >> I'm I'm I'm curious about the very first one, the advisory board for tracking student progress. >> Is that coordinating with the people in college? You're sort of doing that. >> They're going to be all the department chairs have had a, a, a training session on this at the chairs caucus. They're going to be working with the associate deans and department chairs and various professional advisory groups on campus. And there's going to be software that's rolled out so we can track the students and their progress. And it's going to eat, even start before they get here. So we know what they are, their academic credentials ad, before they come in to make sure that they attract into the right courses. And then if they need help to me to be really monitored in a good way while they're thinking. >> Okay, thank you. >> Bear with me a moment. >> Settings or o here you will see a different version of it, but that's fine. >> So now we're onto announcements by, by me. I have a few announcements before we get onto to, to Fred's, Nancy's presentations. The first thing I'd like to point out is, is one of the responsibilities that we as senators is to bring back what we here at these fact, at the faculty senate meetings, bringing this back to our constituency, preside, Gerardi, your daddy and I who spoke to the, to the chairs caucus, understand that a lot of the chairs don't actually know what's going on in this room. So please take back information you here back to your back to your representative groups. Another thing I'd like to announce is that we're gonna have an open hearing a week from today on a university budget. It'll be Monday, 14th of March at four PM. It'll be brought by the faculty senate budget committee. Discuss the University budget. Okay, another thing that I'd like to point out, we're going to, we're going to hear about general education. But in the Chronicle from January 15th, there's an interesting article on the overview of education in this by Nicholas layman. It starts out with what a professional schools do, but it quickly goes into general education. And it was a very interesting article in September of 2015 by Frank Rooney, also about the role of general education in people's college education. So are you required to read this? >> The answer is yes. >> Will it be on the test? >> I say, well, okay, the next thing I'd like to to tell you about is one of, I think I've told you before is I keep meeting very, very interesting people here as is faster. So my friend Nieto introduced me to collect gator, who's a professor in the Art and like she's got here, and this is a slide that you gave me is she has a project called The Beauty Shop project and they presented it presented part of this as harris Joyce it to 2014 Wilmington fringe festival. They performed, submitted stories with the backdrop of historical hair images and showed videos of women talking about their hair. So here's not somebody you normally think about is, is as an artistic kind of a thing. But when you stop and think about it, of course, people spend a large amount of time and I just love walking around and seeing the purple hair and ended deadlocks and all the rest of it. Your current project is actually sort of interesting, has grown out of that. So they have a grant now. Their current project is training salon practitioners to and responding to clients who are victims of domestic violence. I don't know about you, but when I go to the barber, I mean, I don't have a lot to go to the barber about it, but we share more than than than than you share with your average person. She knows all about, you know, my daughters and my son-in-law and so forth. And anyway, the idea here is presumably when, when people are coming to there to there to there are there Islam practitioner is that they will also open up. And this will be another avenue where people can address domestic violence. So this grant is on social media as the beauty shop project, Delaware to disseminate relevant information. And so now I'll turn the floor over to Fred Hofstetter, past president of the, of the Faculty Senate. And he's going to, going to lead a discussion on progress we're making in general. >> Thank you enough. >> Well, it's an honor to be the point person on this, but I am not doing the work. My role is to coordinate this and sort of keep the Senate's sense of what was approved. And in terms of Robert's rules, what hap what's happening a day is the report and you're going to hear five reports from the five committees that are working on the various gen ed issues. So from a parliamentary standpoint, you've already charged them to do this work. You've already approved the resolutions and and what what they're bringing to you today are the reports. And up first is Avron Everyone Abraham. Let's just see. >> I need two. >> We've got an interesting setup here today. >> Just gets pushed down arrows to get to the right or up arrows to get to her lie down arrows to get to the next slide. Golf, right? >> I got yeah. >> What's interesting is you don't see them here. >> Yes, you have to have it figured out. You have faith, but ok. >> So, so, so AB Ron's going to start and then each person in turn, just so that I don't waste time by coming up in between, let's just have each person in return call on the next person. Thank you. >> Hey, I push down and I'm going to do the hard work. >> So thank you for letting us do this. >> I as all of you are aware, there are different Janet committees that are sort of functionings a semester to implement some of the resolutions that were passed by this body. So the first of which is a first-year seminar, guidelines and learning outcomes. And again, this is a committee made up of everyone representers from every college plus a number represented from student life full. So we were charged with actually looking at the first-year seminar and making it a little more consistent across campus, as most of you probably know, is that the first year seven was historically have been sort of a patchwork of different causes, everything from survey courses to a UNI v1 01, which is really as much a transition costs. Anything else? So the Senate charged us with putting together a minimal syllabus, if you'd like to call it that, that would cover some of the topics that the Senate felt were imperative for all students, making it a slightly more consistent approach across campus. So this committee has met and we have an initial draft of the report that we're working with and just saw you away, is that we're still taking feedback and discussing those things that we've come up with which will be start to be implemented in the fall. So it will go through a process like most other courses on campus where there'll be an approval of first-year seminars across campus as submitted by departments, colleges, et cetera. Each of those syllabi I'm going to have to meet the criteria outcomes that have been formulated by this committee and approve initially by the Senate. And obviously, I think it's important to understand that the first two seminar, it is disconcerting to see something else in the slides. >> I'm sorry. >> First-year seminar obviously takes many forms, but it is the first common experience that students have on campus. So we want to make it as common in some ways as we can. And it also is the first part of a journey through general education at the University of Delaware. So you will see that the outcomes as defy as define. Really Mira, many of those things that I've talked about in the larger general education documents. So you'll see these topics, each one of them is a brief description below them. >> But again, I refer you to the genet website. >> What do you call it? Afraid dot Google site that really has more specifics on the each of these topic areas. So again, we would just following the directive of the senate with these five outcomes. And each of them now has a number of fairly short objectives. Underneath of them we sort of define exactly what we'd like as a, as a university with respect to these. And remembering also that we aren't going to be everything to everyone. This is just the first step. So the intention is that causes within majors, courses, within colleges And outside of classroom experiences will also add to meeting these objectives, the broader objectives with specific things done within the first eight to ten or 12 weeks, depending on the how the seminar looks. So again, we go from ethics and academic honesty, responsible use of the internet and social media, academic policies and procedures, I think some of them, both of them are fairly self-explanatory. The objectives that we have a fairly simple and easy to achieve, I think are relatively easy to achieve with some commitment from the faculty that are actually handling these seminars. I do want to say that they were not done in a vacuum, that we've talked to a lot of people on campus to do with these that are related to these outcomes Kevin gave me. I see up there who actually is working hard on the social media one, which is a really a different one from which prevented before in any of the seminar. Israeli, we also have the understanding that some of these topics faculty doing first-year seminars may not be equipped to handle o, not comfortable with the information. So we're working on ways to disseminate information to help faculty feel comfortable with an information, or to bring in people from outside of the particular seminar to help with the presentation of that information. So for instance, Kevin is a good example. We're working on the social media with a group of faculty, right, Kevin. And they will probably come up with a module that will be either one class or two classes that could be taken, that could take place within a seminar that would help a faculty through the process of a student getting a better feel for what it means to be responsible with respect to social media. So that's a good example of how there were other ones that we've got. I think the diversity one is obviously Emily's here too. I saw had actually will be presenting later, but obviously is part of our committee. So she's looking also at this, what is it that we're doing as a campus through four years of a student's education. >> And this is really the first step. >> So when you look at the objectives that are specific to diversity, you will see a fairly low level approach to this, but really hoping to get students on the road to understanding more, having better communication, and moving towards meeting the objectives of general education with respect to diverse. So obviously, Emily had a lot to do with writing those objectives for this particular outlined and guidelines, academic policies and procedures, safety and wellness is another one that we actually just Party started the whole conversation on F y as, in some ways as to making it consistent across campus because we were seeing is that a lot of seminars or not, including issues related to alcohol, bystander awareness, things like that across campus. And it seemed sort of disingenuous to say half the, half the campus gets it off the campus. Does. I think what you'll see based on this is that the whole campus will get exposure to issues around safety and wellness with specific emphasis around alcohol and drugs. So I think that's an important piece of, of making this consistent across campus. >> And I think the right thing to do. >> So I'm going to leave it there. And now we have another or five presentations. And I how you want to handle is frayed reliving questions now or later, good, good. >> Any questions you may have, you may promote their error. >> And a place to see all this for cyclists on the website statistically it down unfortunately. >> Sidebar at facts and iq delta ID. >> All the materials that are being talked about today, all the reports they're talking about and this presentation itself, they're all back there in the file cabinet. >> Thank you. So I was here last month introducing the Corps pilot, the request for proposals. I'm delighted to report that we had an overwhelming response, or at least greater response. And I'd anticipated we had 28 full proposals that were submitted. Many, many more inquiries about can I have an extension. Answer was no, or we do in later iterations of this stance was maybe and so and so I was the committee was really gratified by the response to this. So out of the 28 proposals, many of which were were, you know, most of which were very good and very appropriate for the core pilot. We selected six that were we, judge, were ready to go. We had funding for six. And so so what we went with, and you can see up here, those are not the precise titles, but those are the sort of gives you a sense of the grand challenges and great debates that each of the six are dressing. So where we're going for big questions for going for global issues, we're going for timely timeliness and the subject matter. And then again, remember we are going for a common thread through here of emphasizing written communication, ethical reasoning, engaged citizenship, and specific principles and objectives of general education. And so that's where we stand where right now in the process of working with the provost with in terms of resourcing these? We're working with the registrar in terms of getting the schedule, but everything seems to be moving forward as as smoothly as can be expected. >> Where do we go from here? >> We're going to bring together all of the faculty members who are teaching the core pilot courses. And I should say that these are, these are thumb off, well, they represent, let's see, five colleges on campus. Summer team taught, some are, some are single taught. And so they, you know, we've covered a wide base. I think we're going to be bringing them together with the ad hoc committee to talk about expectations in terms of common goals, we want to see each of them, each of the courses emphasize we're going to develop an assessment and evaluation rubric that can be used throughout the semester next fall to gather data about how well these courses are accomplishing their goals, including engagement, including writing and including the other things. And then as a committee will be talking about where we whether we need to extend this to another semester, whether we have the resources to do so. If we do something in the spring, I think we want to sort of focus in particular models of instruction or particular topics that perhaps weren't represented in the, the initial batch and target those. And then we will be, or at least we're supposed to be coming back at the end of the year, next year, May 20, 17, with a recommendation about whether to proceed with a core requirement. And if we recommend that, how will do so? And all of that will be based on the data we gather through our assessment and evaluation of the pilot. >> Thank you. >> Go to the next slide and I'm going to look. >> Thank you. Thank you. This is very technical that down button capstone was the capstone resolution was in fact that starting in fall of 17, every major would have a capstone, designated capstone course as part of their curricula. And it was the assignment to kind of make that happen was, or the process to make that happen was delegated to the Undergraduate Studies Committee. >> We've struggled with this a little bit. >> We've talked to the chairs, we've talked to some different routes and so on. But basically we're going to use the same process that is currently used in the course revision or new course submission. The process, if you've ever done that, if you've ever filled out those forms, you know that when you say you want to do a, let's say a multicultural course, you are directed to a set of questions and you have to fill out those questions. And then Undergraduate Studies reviews your answer to those questions to say yes, this qualifies as a multi-cultural or no, it does not. >> We're going to use the exact same model. >> So nothing will be different than when you submit either a new course for a revised course or capstone designation, you will get an opportunity to answer questions. >> Actually, one is because this the top part there with the glow, I'm told that's probably below my tech guy, Brad Hofstadter. They criteria were really fairly straightforward. >> I mean, there was only a couple of things that you did. So you have to explain how your course will require students to engage and explorations in which the outcomes are unknown. Or you have to explain how the students will engage in self-assessment, reflection and analysis, that prayer then for future success. And everybody will have to explain how the learning goals support some or all of the objectives of jet. >> Add the five standard objectives, gen ed. >> So next, starting in August, anybody that would like. >> Everybody needs to have a capstone course in place. So you starting next August, when the registrar's office opens the course submission process, you need to fill out the forms to say, yes, I want this course. County, it it's a new course, it's a revised course. And then it will, you will answer these questions. And then there will be likely, because next year there's gotta be a lot of these we anticipate. >> So there'll probably be an Ad Hoc Subcommittee of Jan. Jan ad is got plenty to do on its own. >> So we're going to likely have kind of an ad hoc committee to look at these and make a rolling yes or no. >> Certainly we would go back to the submitter and say, we think you should do this. >> Everybody will have a chance to revise their forms and hopefully get approval. So that's what we're proposing it this point. >> So just hit this, can only see what's on your mind there. >> Forget about all right, first, I want to thank Bob for allowing me a few extra slides in this. >> There's a bit of an ask involved in this set of slides, so we can talk about that a little bit later. So the starting point or no, that's there, it is. The starting point for the discussion of curricular mapping is the five objectives of general education. And our goal is to find in our academic programs where students can develop these skills. Okay? And the Faculty Senate Committee on general education is charged to assist departments and programs administering undergraduate majors in ensuring full opportunity for all students to attain competency and the objectives of general education. And specifically, we are to provide departments with curricular maps to help in their internal reviews. >> Okay, so we're charged to provide departments with maps. >> But because all of our majors are made up of courses that come from all across campus. We need to first develop a campus wide registry of courses that are coded based on what objectives they emphasize. And this is where we're asking for full faculty engagement. >> Ok, so the mapping kit, this here as the mapping kit, okay? >> This is a set of materials that we are providing to help all departments code the courses that they teach based on whether or not they emphasize any of the Gen Ed objectives. Okay. And I believe that our committee has been very thoughtful in developing a mapping process that balance is validity with the effort required from you. We piloted the mapping process and we refined it where we could. And we are learning that it can actually be a straightforward task that doesn't take very much time. We also suggests that this is not useless busy work being imposed on faculty. It's actually a very important first step in a larger process that will provide departments, faculty, and students with critical information that you couldn't otherwise get. Now I know you're all looking at that deadline right there and I'm happy to take questions later. But first, I'd like to give you a simple outline of this mapping process. Okay, this is the Excel spreadsheet that c tau, the Center for Teaching and the assessment of learning, sent to my department so that we could map our courses. >> Okay, the columns represent each of the 12 gen ed objectives. >> And the rows contain all the, all of the classes in my department that were taught over the past two years. >> And these are the criteria that you will use to code the courses that you teach for not applicable or no emphasis, M for minor emphasis, and S for significant or major emphasis of the learning objective in your course. If you're teaching these courses, you should be pretty familiar with what you're doing. So after coating your courses, you will give your sheet to the department chair. And the chair will collect the sheets from all the faculty or the information from all the faculty and send one spreadsheet back to the Center for Teaching and the assessment of learning. Center for teaching and assessment of learning will aggregate all these, all these sheets and then put them together into what will be the course registry, where all the courses across campus are mapped based on what gen ed objectives they cover. Okay? This, this registry will then be given to the Office of the Registrar and reports will be created for each program in each department. Now when you have those those reports and hand, you will be able to do a gap analysis to see if you need to or want to make course or program revisions so that you can meet the objectives or provide opportunity for students to meet the objectives. And we believe that the registry will also become a very valuable tool for advising purposes. >> Ok. >> And this is one of the things that were rather excited about. >> Okay? >> Course registry could actually be used with some creative advising software to promote more intentionality in the student's course selection so that they can understand their own landscape of the skills that they're developing based on what courses they're teaching. And then stack some courses and some skill developments in certain areas, like for this student, those green bars are stacked in the area that you might generally call communication. And then this could hopefully become a good marketing tool for the student when they graduate, where they might bring this, this graph into the materials that they used to sell themselves, where they have some scientific development. On the right, some communications, et cetera. And that's actually the end of my brief summary. I want to thank the gen ed committee for really thoughtful work in developing this, this process. C tau is excited to help units do the mapping. You know, if they should need the help. And I especially want to thank the faculty advance in advance for, for finding the time to do this, do this work so that when the faculty do this, it will enable our committee to continue making progress towards gen ed reform. >> Thank you. >> That gets written. >> Oh, I see. >> I've been so curious about what this would look like. Omega. Ok, so our committee was charged with revising the guidelines for the multicultural requirement. So this happened in the spring, and we were charged to revise the guidelines using the DC six as James Jones cause the sort of set of Diversity Learning guidelines developed in the Center for the Study diverse of diversity. We're using those as the basis for the new multicultural requirement. >> So what you will see is that they have gone from six to four. >> To make things a little bit more straightforward for people, we combined the first two elements of that rubric and we eliminated the last one because it was really difficult to assess with the course. But the new multicultural requirement was developed by our committee. It went by James Jones. It went by a lot of it's been through a lot of committees and gotten a lot of responses are sort of general Committee for the general education reform has also looked at this. We've taken feedback from Undergraduate Studies, so it's been through quite a few rounds at this point. Each of these four elements has sort of specific language about locating oneself or learning about a particular artistic tradition, experience, history, cultural production, personal and social responsibility is one that lends itself especially well to service learning courses. For those who are already doing service learning courses and departments, these can be ideas are coming up with that could put into practice, be put into practice but a service or a new version of these courses. >> You could also actually put some of these things into practice. >> Understanding global systems get students to think about institutions, ideologies, rhetoric, larger systems, how larger system shape individual identity and understanding. So it starts from the individual. Perspective taking. Who am I in the world? How do I relate to others? Thinks about cultural difference, thinks about personal and social responsibility, and sort of ethics of interaction. And then goes toward the larger systematic. And the fourth one, what we're asking for courses that will meet the multicultural requirement is that they satisfy three of these four requirements. So they are not required to satisfy all of them. The process, as Steve was talking about for the capstone is going to be, it's going to be very similar process. There's already a forum in place for the multicultural requirement, either proposing a new one or revising an old one, all courses will need to be recertified. >> So this is another large undertaking. >> And then new courses that are proposed will be approved under the new guidelines. So you will submit a course syllabus. And then we're trying to make this as sort of quick and easy as possible for the faculty member filling out the form and also for the committee reviewing these, you list which of the three criteria your core satisfies and something that demonstrates that you're doing that for each of them. It could be a course assignment and essay prompt, a particular reading, a particular kind of activity that weakens. How does this course address three or the four of these are not? The timeline is that it's the same timeline as the capstone basically. So in the fall, courses will need to be submitted for re certification. And then in the spring, we will have an Ad Hoc Committee as well. Because this will be a lot of courses will staff and ad hoc committee to review all of the courses that are being proposed for re certification. The same thing also that Steve said applies to the multicultural requirement. If for some reason you get turned down, we'll come back to talk to you about what can you do to sort of addressed our concerns and the proposal. This will probably be, as we've been imagining it now, an ad hoc committee composed of two members of the Diversity Inclusion committee to members and undergraduate studies and then to specialist from other departments, faculty members across campus. So a six member committee reviewing all the courses up for re certification. That is everything. As Fred and others have said, the whole new set of guidelines is up on the Google doc site and is in the two that go up on the minutes as well is in the file cabinet, but it's in the file cabinet. So if you want to look at the each individual criteria more in detail, you can find them there. Thank you for all the committee. >> Very strong corporate. >> Can I just have a question about this approval process was just describe why understanding them. For courses to be approved for some fulfillment, there has to be undergraduate studies. >> So it can't be an Ad Hoc Committee do this that's outside of purchase so that when we pop it out, this hires in are of higher status but open to diversity inclusion would work with your graduate studies assess. And that's what Archimedes worked out well, tomorrow after their certification process, one day at a Jillian lines, then it will probably revert. >> Ultimately, that committee has to vote formerly an approve or doesn't count. >> That's true. That's true. Okay. I think we're thinking the Ad Hoc Committee would do the review and then report. >> Although the resolution says a process is in fact a joint effort of the multicultural the diversity committee and undergraduate studies. >> But you're right. I think ultimately they will have to be this ad hoc committees decision will come to undergraduate studies to be certified. >> Yes, I said technical kind of question mark ourselves animal food scientists in a spreadsheet doctrine for the Janet assessment for all the courses within each major. Why you went with something qualitative as opposed to a 0 to five scale where 0 means there's no application and five means it's nit is germane because then you can do things like average across course, course descriptions across a Majors and come up with a minimum for each department to have for their majors. >> And that gives you valuable kind of stuff. >> Yeah, we started at the simplest place where it was originally a 01, it became than three qualitative levels. >> As, as you mentioned, we're going to study the data that we get back from this to figure out things like, what am I felt that day? Maybe the I guess it's possible that this could become a 012. >> Conceivably, we haven't quite figured that out yet. >> Between a one through five, the committee the committee kept getting back to 0 or three levels being adequate to get the distinction between just not covered, minor emphasis, insignificant develop, development. So that was one of the topics that had a lot of discussion in the Canadian, we just kind of kept ending up back in at, at this 1, was that if we had the same scale that we actually do our student evaluations, then we can kind of integrate how are they perceived that Janet goals are being met as well? >> The capacity to use existing tools, online tools, as well as scan. >> She'd talk, I understand your point and I think the use of the rubric repo we proposed necessarily rules out the use, of course, evaluations to then evaluate whether or not they're being met from music. >> This person about the timeline. >> March 21st, the department changed their opinion about this problem. >> This is the timeline that >> And you can believe that we discuss this in the committee. This is a timeline that gives us the greatest chance for success in getting the maps back to the departments. And we can't get a full map back to any department until everybody puts their inputs. And once we get them back to the department, departments need to study these things and then think about the next curricular cycle for revising courses or programs of study. And then put it through the normal curricular review or revision process. >> So it's yeah, I have faculty that have to do this too. >> But another, another point is that I took my faculty through this and got completed in 30 minutes. This process, when I got most of them together, there were a few faculty that putting b in that department meeting. So I knocked on their door and ask them if they could tell me whether or not their course lets them see no minor or significant development of communicate effectively in writing. And just took them to then obviously it's, it's one row in a spreadsheet and I know it's hard to get all this stuff together and everybody's already freakishly busy. >> And this is yet another thing, but it can happen before March 25th or after March 20th at that. >> But it's not something we wanted to put on the on the university who had such a foot. >> I claim that this actually, this, these files are available in the breads site. >> Okay? >> I will say these spreadsheets on two chairs hopefully tomorrow, assuming that there's no major roadblocks through this discussion today. >> I thought all of them to raise in my email was unjust. >> Hercules. >> And we're ready to help clarify. >> Thanks, love. >> There are small scene as process already so far we're optimistic that it's not just the Charlie mindset, Electrical Computer Engineering. >> Just a quick comment. >> You can try to use a Google form with a one question for each column, and then you send that out. >> And the forms create spreadsheets for you. >> So each, each person teaching a class could just fill out the form ones for their class. >> And then you'd get combined into one spreadsheet, that's grapes. >> Instead of trying to email a spreadsheet around or having some human being at the end copy from 25 different spreadsheets into one spreadsheet. >> If we do has longer by Canvas already used the Google, the Google spreadsheet out a Google form, but spreadsheet would work tilted. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I think there are some logistical issues that we're hoping will be solved by selling the shares. >> Just the number of instructors that I've taught proportionate Apaches who they are. In some cases, figuring out where they are, who to send the right courses too. >> So we're hoping that the chairs could smooth out a lot of process to creating a park. >> I agree that's a good idea in theory, but I think it's difficult to figure out exactly who went away to sin August too. >> So I think we're really hoping to chairs are built to help us. >> In addition to the curriculum mapping process when it has been done with a group of faculty together, they do find some great value in finding out what each other are doing. >> And it gives you opportunities to enhance your curriculum just by knowing what people are doing in courses that are your prerequisites for those that are following you push. >> So there is great value in that face-to-face interaction. So that was one of the other reasons for use of a spreadsheet. >> Here's the generality of Jon Bernstein history. >> The generality of these descriptions is perfectly understandable, but I'm more mystify that I want to be about Capstone. >> Could you give a description of a Capstone course? >> Might out because self-reflection and problems are open, you just don't know what all that, of course would a light yeah. >> The the original resolution included some exemplars and we've had a lot of debate about what an exemplar is, but let's just go with examples like, like a senior thesis would be a, be a good example of a senior seminar where all the majors hashed out. >> Global warming would be an example. >> As long as one of those two criteria's in there are, are in fact map I failed. >> And so it might be helpful to look at the original resolution. Okay. If there's no more questions, why don't we have a president can see Target's talked about article to the disease. >> I can be pretty quick on this and it's just an update. So I had expected to be out of the gate on this about mid-February and that's a little bit after that now, so I'm a little behind on this. >> But where we so what I wanted to do is to give you an update. >> The first meeting of the committee is tomorrow morning at eight o'clock. >> Okay. >> So but what I can tell you is this is the charge from the Board of Trustees. And I bolded some things to to to pull things up, but it's, it's really, it pulls out the very same three points that I mentioned to you when I talk to you in the fall that came out of that workshop that they had. They are concerned about the very broad definition of the faculty, where everybody at the university that it is in a professional capacity seems to have as will be defined as the faculty in Article Three of the bylaws. And they're also intrigued about the responsibilities, authority of the faculty and administration. And we went over this a little bit in the fall when I talk to this group. And then they thought there was a disconnect between apparent responsibilities and authority. And so they asked us to take a look at that. And so what I've done is I have, first of all, worked with one of the members of the Board of Trustees to really try to understand what they're trying to get out. I mean, we want to know what their issues are so that when we come back with our recommendations, we can marry these up. >> I mean, that was a starting point. >> And then I'm just this is the committee. So again, this is a charge to me and then what I've done is brought an advisory committee together. So you can see Lynn Okazaki from the provost's office facade. Gerardi, whose your president elect. Calvin Keeler from the AAUP. Lu Rossi, JP Lorenzo, Darcy Reisman, and then as an ad hoc member, trustee guilt sparks will be on the committee. So tomorrow what I've done is I've taken I'm going to give out five things to the committee tomorrow. And after the committee meets and after we have a chance to sort of digest and massage information, I'm go we'll be coming back to you with updates and reports to the rest of the semester. So the next faculty meeting or the next Faculty Senate meeting, I would expect to get up here and be able to give you some indication of how this has gone. One of the things that I have talked with Babu Pula about is the fact that at some point what we'll want to do is get the input from the larger faculty. And so whether the Faculty Senate doesn't open hearing, whether I do a hearing or a just a town hall forum. Or maybe what I suggested in the spirit of shared governance is that we do something together and get as much input as we can once we've developed a straw man that we can put forward. Okay. So let the committee do its work for a little bit here. >> We're going to meet every other week and and then I'll come back to you. >> I'll tell you how we're doing in April. If we have some magic gum, everything coalesces after the first meeting and we think we can pull everybody together. Baba, I'll let you know and we can decide to try to set up a hearing probably after spring break sometime. Okay. But that's kind of where things are right now. Any questions on that? >> Alright. Good. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> So now outwards to the sort of the meat of the agenda, the next thing on is the consent agenda. And so and the Consent Agenda, remember, these are relatively minor changes that we've made to programs. Maybe reminder name changes or for example, renumber the chemistry courses or whatever. And so what we've, we've put together here is I think there's 39 items on the consent agenda this time. And so why did what I asked for is if if anybody sees any saw anything on the consent agenda, they were like pulled off of the consent agenda. I'd like to at your emotion about that now hearing no motion, I'd like to hear a motion to accept the Consent. Agenda. Second. All in favor? >> Opposed. >> Passes unanimously. >> Okay. Now we're into the regular agenda and so we have nine most, we have nine resolutions before us. And the first resolution is this. Establish the Bachelor of Science in Health and Physical Education. And this comes from the undergraduate committee, Steve? >> Yes. >> But it's not number one on the beginning of the meeting. Remember, we move number one to number nine. So it's now number two. It's alright. >> Alright. >> Yes, you know, they, this, the department and the College, Harold and our opinion have met all the criteria based on their bylaws and so on, approvals. >> And so we've supported this recommendation on I think the discussion. >> John, near lawyer second. Second. By Martha. Is there discussion? >> Yes. Yeah. >> I might recognize parent Edwards here afternoon and my colleagues, Janice Vivek, Bonnie Bergson, Steve Goodwin evaporates. >> Nicola, and I would like to thank you for your time. I'm here this afternoon to ask you not to dissolve the health and physical education teacher preparation program. We're asking to remain viable for potential reorganization to meet emerging educational needs. Physical Education Program has been in place on our campus since 1933. I sent a narrative of our faculty and student achievements and awards, which are involved both nationally, regionally, state, and then community endeavors. As a reflection of our success, USA today in 2013, voted our HAPE program ninth best in the country. One of the issues for us is teacher education program enrollments often shift dramatically, more so often than other disciplines were currently experiencing a downturn. National teacher education enrollment is down 10% from 2004 to 2012. And that's via the United States Department of Education post-secondary Data. University of Delaware teacher preparation programs are also experiencing some of these same lower numbers. >> And that includes our health and physical education program. >> Conversely and program problematically, our nation is facing the largest teacher retirement in history. And that's based on the National Commission on Teaching and America's Future. The need for health and physical education teachers will increase because the health, The United States Senate and House of Representatives passed in December, on December ninth, 2015. Every child succeeds at both Health and Physical Education. We're elevated and acknowledged as part of core subjects, which will now be taught in all public schools. This means that school districts and states had access to federal funds which can strengthen both health and physical education programs, and additionally hire new teachers. Our faculty sees this as an important step in strengthening Delaware K12 physical education and health programs and assisting our graduates attain and secure jobs. As our enrollment numbers lessened, our dean and department chair charged our HAPE faculty to bring our program more in line with the college mission and reflect responsibility based budgeting more effectively is used for our program around RGB include HAPE. Faculty has hired with an average of 75% teaching load, which lessens our time to secure grants and to conduct research. A percentage of our HP faculty must work in clinical settings, which causes us to be onsite longer hours as opposed to on campus. We use many venues to teach our classes. And that includes classrooms, the pool, computer lab, gins, and a variety of fields which are all necessary to adequately educate our students. The a bubble, it's a program criteria make meeting RB be simulations really challenging. But we know that the University is working on a new budget system and we believe that we may be more viable under the new budget stipulations. As per request, the ASP faculty tried a variety of techniques to enhance our enrollment. >> We want you to know that we made concerted efforts. >> This is really important to us that, you know this. We rewrote our classes and reconfigured our curriculum to increase enrollment. We created a marketing pamphlet which ended up not being funded. We reorganize the methods block and student teaching supervision formula to increase faculty time on campus. Hb faculty members worked at each blue and golden Saturday with an ever to recruit potential students. >> We called identified students and invited them on campus to attend one of our classes. Our students volunteer at local school events in an effort to recruit students as well. Hp faculty wrote too new for new miners dance, health and wellness coaching, science health, physical activity, and disability, and attempt to attract new students into our program. Hp II classes are taught with 2.5 faculty. As we teach an additional amount of classes in our department. I need to share with you. My my colleagues have asked me to share with you some concerns we have about the information on the Faculty Senate form. The program changed. Burn the third paragraph under RATIONAL_B or proposed program change, the narrative states, faculty express concern that enrollment decline would not provide critical mass to effectively educate our students. In meeting with my colleagues today, we all agree that we did not say that we would not meet critical mass. And additionally, we would never say we have an inability to educate our students. The next segment, HAPE faculty expressed concern that students currently in the program would run the risk of not graduating in a timely manner. Again, never expressed a concern about graduation, as we had been guaranteed that our students will have the same academic experience and success as private as previous students. Document continues to state that HP is experiencing decreasing emphasis in the state of Delaware. Upon looking at red clay and Christina website last night, they saw no information that states decreasing. Hape says both districts require Health and Physical Education for graduation. I continued to look on the DOE website and again, beginning with the class of 2016, a public school students shall be granted a state of Delaware diploma when such student has successfully completed, and it lists math, English, social studies, and additionally one credit and physical education and 1.5 credit in health education. So that means that there is viable need for health and physical education in the state of Delaware. Document also states that dollar that university can meet the future needs of HAPE in the state. On the Delaware State website, DE SU students are only able to sit for certification and physical education. This means that Dell, where students that wish to be certified in health and physical education must pay out-of-state tuition. Last page of the form states that in compliance with pH I THE AN bylaws, a confidential faculty vote was held to determine continuance of the AES PE program. The vote integrity is in question. Some faculty expressed feeling influenced into voting to dissolving the program because they were told it was saved HP jobs. Some votes were based on faulty information. In conclusion, doctors Vivek Edwards, Goodwin, Russian Coba, and Professor Ferguson, believe the above information, in addition to the following reasons, should guide the decision to allow the Health and Physical Education Program to remain in such time that it can be reconfigured to meet the evolving educational needs. Our university, our new university president taking office institution of any budget system. New federal legislation which increases the need for health and fiscal educators in Delaware and the nation increased focus on preparing teachers to work with persons of disability, which is a really important issue in the state of Delaware. All of these we believe are strong factors and we are asking you to vote to retain the health and physical education teacher preparation program. And for me personally, I just want to tell you that I really appreciate your time. This has been an incredibly challenging to years for us and even have you listen is really very, very helpful. Thank you for your time. >> So so the motion on the floor is to delay voting on this until time-specific, which would be April 2017. Is there further discussion? >> Bell asked me the question as it says in the department as close to the major isn't possible if there were more applications. >> I Yeah, that's a tough one to answer. I think. Well, we'd have to have an is particularly disability studies there How many needs? And then reorganizing around that. I can't speak to the specifics of that. >> Is there any are there any histologies? What's our field sites? How many fact ATI program for their life that they don't agree with this resolution. And I'd be more minimal. >> I'm sorry. >> The question is how many are in the program? >> There's actually five program and but in actuality, 2.5. absolutely. One of the courses that teach each p. So are you asking they're all in agreement? >> Is personally honored? >> Those spike or no disagreeing. >> But this visible, the words I just read come from all five. That is absolutely correct. And I spoke with them again today to make sure I was giving exactly what their words one. >> So yes. But that's not the side. >> I'm sorry. The Department is bigger than Oh, absolutely. >> Yes. >> That's supposed to ask questions, especially questions. >> So a comment so capping that Dean of the College of Health Sciences. So may I, may I make a company's eddies? So as some of you may know, if you've been in the Senate for awhile. So first, I want to thank Karen for her comments about the program. It has been It's history, an excellent program. But what we have seen over the years, and so some of you know that seven years ago, we actually considered closing the program at that time. So I think before that there may have been as many as 63 students in the program. There are now 20 students in the program. Ten of those will graduate and there will be ten remaining. So while we all think that physical education, of course, is extremely important, we, what we have done over the years is, and Karen actually did a really great job of describing all of the efforts that they have done to try to engage and get more students into the program. And I think what we're seeing is a change over the time period of what students coming to you d actually want to take and what programs they want to engage. And so we've seen this precipitous decline in the enrollment. The students who are coming here and are being accepted at UT are not choosing this as a program. So seeing this over the time period, what we have done is worked with the faculty in physical education and those in adaptive physical education and said, let's focus on another area. Let's focus on population health. I've met many times with the faculty as well as the chair to ensure that in fact they will all continue to have jobs. Here. We are just moving them into the focus areas where in fact the students are coming in and demanding those courses. There are programs in physical education in universities close phi, I don't let's see. There's Westchester, there's rho, and del. State also has a program. Thompson tell son also has a program. We had also done research and look at where the jobs. Are. There more jobs open that are not being filled? No. Not jobs open. And we can talk about that in schools, but I think those are sort of the most important. We value these faculty, we appreciate them. But the students who are coming to the University of Delaware or not choosing this area. >> Is there further discussion about yesterday? >> I have a question for Dean mats. >> The APA says the BS in Health and Physical Education has a moratorium on emissions at this time. >> Can you tell me who place a moratorium? Yes. I kept well, so last year at about the time that we were accepting students, we've arrived. Peterson, who is the department chair, I think Susan Hall, our deputy D and myself we met was to Mintaka Rosseau and I can't remember who else was in the room. And we discussed this is not what caused 1020 students and after this ten students to only be in the program, the numbers had already been dwindling and that's why they called us in to say, do you want to continue to accept students into this program where the numbers are already dwindling and we said no, what we'd like to do with this time is stopped that admissions because again, we've been moving towards this. >> So I'm a faculty. Hey, faculty were not involved in that decision. >> Faculty have been, have been engaged and know about these decisions. I mean, if there aren't students coming to the program, how can you hold those classes? And again, the other thing was when we had this meeting with the provost office, it was also saying how many students are applying here? And so not so it was one level to look at the number applying, it's another to look at the ones that actually will meet. So are there or not there are many apply for this particular area and this program. And then a small number being accepted and this is after AS having a on those seven-year time period to try to do some things to ramp the soft department. >> So afraid. >> So I I'm Susan poem, deputy. >> Oh, sorry. >> Can I recognize this as since I'm about yes. Well, say yeah, sorry. >> I well, I just wanted to make it clear. >> There was a faculty vote. >> The entire Department of behavioral health and nutrition, faculty pizza, had a vote and it was not unanimous, but it was certainly a majority vote. >> Two closest program at this time, if you open the Developmental Studies Program, Development, I, my question is really about this new federal mandate from the Department of Education. >> That the Common Core is that does that change thing that I mean, we were asked to start the Speech Pathology at the at the behest of the Department of Education and was one of the stakeholders. >> And so is this the same kind of situation that there's going to be an uptick in in this way. It just seems like that's a pretty significant or is it not? I I don't think I mean, again, what's going to happen in terms of that implementation? We have no idea. I also think that as we continue to look at the students that are being admitted to the University of Delaware. It's just it's not an interest area of the students. >> Whichever field sites this you'd be specific problem or all the other problems are all of the other universities. >> So I think if you, again, I'm not the expert in this particular area that as we had these issues come up. If you go out and I mean, many of you have children, you know, in the high schools and the middle schools when budgets are tight, these are the areas that are, that are cut. So again, when we had done our research before and looked at hiring of faculty, and these are not faculty, but teachers in these areas, it says so the motion on the floor is to consider whether or not we should delay vote on this for one year until April of 2017. >> Is there further discussion? I mark ourselves animal food scientists. >> Well, will that if this resolution has to feed a will that affect the ability the moratorium on admissions into the program, meaning that if it's postpone one year with a moratorium, V, lift it, cuz I'm not gonna be able to get more students if there's someone from moratorium what Edition program. >> So you've already occurred for the right. >> Chris night procedurally. Can I recognize Karen? Well, sure. Yes. >> First of all, thank you. And second of all, I think the issue that they've asked me to bring to you is all what demanded said is true. And she's been very helpful throughout this very difficult process. >> And I appreciate your effort. >> What they're asking is because a new concerns educationally one-year, particularly for the disability studies group to reorganize around potential for creating a different focus on a major. So in what demat is saying, the people who choose to come down and may not be the people that were previously our program, but certainly disability studies because we need to educate people across the lifespan with disability is an issue for her, is what she's asking me to bring to you yesterday. >> Josh reside material science, engineering. Can anyone identify, given that the faculty will all be retained, any real downside barrier, because it seems like doing it for a year is at worst, an easy choice, but no new significant downside that's been mentioned. >> So that So Fred Hofstetter, past president. So the motion that's on the floor would not lift the moratorium was President at the time the program was put on moratorium. >> And in the Executive Committee, we held meetings with the chair and with the faculty that are affected by this. And what we strongly urge the department to do was to follow its bylaws to take these boats, bring this before the faculty, as opposed to waiting. And so the idea behind that was so that it can be aired before the full Faculty Senate before it was too late to do something else. I don't know. >> Any adverse impact would be acquainted with another here, but the proposal does not lift the moratorium, but no action currently on the floor Lipset moratorium. >> The only motion on the floor does delays whether or not we'll vote on the dissolution of the department either now or in April of 2017. >> Major, I have a question. If these new guidelines allowed you to reorganize in some way, would that degree still have the, say, would it be the same degree or would it be different set of courses have a different name? I mean, 11 possibility is to just establish this one and then as you reorganize and so on, come back with a with a new BA in whatever it happens to be. >> Kristen, I will recognize you. Yes. >> Why am I understanding fan and my colleague is that there are anchored force is already in place. And instead of going through the whole process of re configuring was would take a lot of time in my house and going through a lot of process to get things approved that's in place. And so I'm thinking that that's what what she thought. The disability studies minors RUN places as well. So there could be partnering of the two of them and then working for what she's looking for. What she has told me what she's looking for is like lifelong health and wellness for those with disabilities. So it would be a reconfiguration of what's already in place. >> So pi VS still from what I understand, Martha. >> Okay. >> So so what word you're talking about? And we worked in the disability studies. >> Might not know. >> Okay. A different disability studies minor in addition, kinda lingering me to marry and I'm putting words in her mouth, she's not here since mu one to explain to you her but my understanding is it would just be thankful that they thought would be vital. >> Okay. So the motion on the floor is whether to delay voting on this now or until April 2017. Do I hear anymore discussion tomorrow? Hearing none. All those in favor of delaying the vote on this until 2017. >> Please raise your cards. >> Opposed. Okay. So we're not going to delay it until until April 2017 to Now, the resolution is on the floor. Is the resolution whether or not we should dissolve the Department of Health and Physical Education. Is there discussion on that? Further discussion, but it keeps and department. But it's the degree per car. Yes. It's sad to depart a discussion on that. So hearing none all in favor of the dissolution of the degree program in Health and Physical Education. Please raise your cards. 27 opposed. 13. So the motion the resolution carries to dissolve the probed the Bachelor of Science in health and physical education. Okay. Our next resolution. And Steve, Could you could you introduce this one, please? >> Sure. This is, I think a little less controversial. I hope this is a major in the College of Ag and natural resources and environmental soil science. It was put in many years ago, but over the last several years, we've had one faculty member retire. >> We've had another move on to come more administrative types of things. And you can see three students over a five-year period. There's currently no students in it. >> We recommend this established codes their second. >> Second. Okay. Is there a discussion hearing? None. All in favor of dissolution of the Bachelor of Science degree in Environmental Science. >> Okay. >> Opposed. Passes overwhelmingly. Okay. >> The next one, again, Steve, basically from the same department. >> So >> Plants soil science is this a major that has struggled for many years to attract students and averages one to two. >> There are currently two students. >> There is just not faculty support for this. Continuing this, this major and undergraduate studies recommends that we disestablish a terror. >> Second. Second. Do a hearing the discussion hearing none, all in favor of dissolution to the degree of protection, all opposed. >> Pests is overwhelmingly okay. >> Steve, One more, one more. >> This one is simply the change in the name of the BA in mathematical sciences to a BA in mathematics. >> I think with the original agenda went out, there were there was an additional attachments which was in the air. >> I believe this is now the correct one. And this is comes with the support of the department. >> And so we see no reason not to recommend that. >> We have a second. Is there any discussion? Okay. All in favor proposed yes. >> Is overwhelmingly OK. >> I'll recognize flocked to introduce this in graduate studies. >> Told us last April. >> And we had a few questions for them concerning their enrollment history, how they were doing some of their assessments, basically some more data. So the provided that coming back around, the committee supported it. >> They had plenty of students, actually more than they had anticipated. >> And so we are second. >> So enlarge ended, but it's on the agenda. >> The agenda that's always got second. >> Okay. Is there discussion, hearing? None. >> All in favor or opposed? >> Okay. Passes overwhelmingly. >> Texture. >> Ok. >> Exactly the right way. >> So this is a new program that is actually model off some of the other language programs, and I think Spanish and German. >> And so the question was really, why wasn't it started earlier? There's faculty to support it, and really all the pieces are in place. And so this looks like a pretty attractive graduate degree discussion. Hearing not all in favor opposed as theirs, overwhelmingly. >> But the Interaction Design degree is very interesting. >> We actually had community members that wanted to enroll. >> So this kind of Mary's design with the human factors. And so how technology, human testing rack. >> We did have some questions about their admissions procedures in some of the policies for their capstone project. >> So they don't accept the GREs. >> This is more of a portfolio that you submit for an application. >> And they do expect to get people from a lot of different fields coming into here. >> So it looks like a very interesting program. >> There are no other major issues. >> Sarah, discussion, hearing none. All in favor? Opposed. Yes. >> Is overwhelmingly okay. >> Yep. >> The DNP program. >> We actually have a program here in nursing practice, but it's at the master's level. >> So this is partly due to the accreditation standards that is driving this to a doctoral level. >> So that's a Clinical Doctorate. >> So we have the faculty in place. >> It's really, it's not just taking a masters degree to a doctorate. >> There, there is a significant revision and in what they're doing. >> But if you don't know that nurse practitioners have a lot of responsibilities and capabilities for much like a primary care physician. And it's a very hot area I know and how science is right now. So we expect that this company take off pretty quickly there. Discussion, hearing none all in favor, opposed. >> Charlie, finally, CPU guess. >> Actually, I'm going to defer my discussion, add to Naomi Nash, who is here from the registrar's office. >> This this issue of similar courses, duplicate courses, credit for similar courses was brought to you by the registrar's office. And she is going to provide a bit of background which is included in the attachment up there because this is this is a fairly technical issue from out from the registrar's point of view. >> So I'm going to introduce Naomi and she's scared to death. >> So please nobody Toronto anything. >> So they owe me go ahead and type of failure in stand up. >> If you want to stay here, whatever you want to. >> Well, thank you, Dr. 18 kinda all of the evidence says I'm not scared, but the number of people who wished me good luck made me a little nervous. Certainly the registrar's office brought it to undergraduate studies, but we were not the ones to bring about the questions and concerns regarding the policies and question that was brought to us by the College Assistant Dean and assistant deans brought. This concerns us, I guess back in 2012, Kelvin 13, probably even earlier, complaining about how to enforce this policy and the inconsistencies surrounding these policies in it. We sort of call it duplicate credit, but in the catalog, if you take a course more than once, but really we're referring to courses of similar content and course sequence thing. And if you review what the current is to say is that courses that have this notation on them, it would say that you would not earn credit more than once if you would take a course in similar content or if you would take a course at a sequential order. The policy, I believe looking back through Senate minutes, was pass about 20 years ago. But lo and behold, all of those 20 years has never actually been enforced or actually true credit for both attempts has always stayed on a student's overall academic record. So the challenges that we have, an academic policy that is not enforced and the way that it's currently written, it's not enforceable. We have gone back and forth with numerous discussions with the colleges. In 2013. We comprise a list of which courses seem to have that notation on them. I felt like there was several dozen, we're talking 5060 courses. And when a student has, of course, in this situation, what is happening in some cases can vary between the colleges. So a prime example is a student comes in into university studies. They don't know what they want to major in. So they choose or its courses based on what they think they're going to major in. They choose to take Chemistry 103 because that's the chemistry, general chemistry course they think they're going to take. They end up having a change of heart. They ended up towards engineering or something else, and they take Chemistry. >> 111. >> What the policy says is that the students should only earn credit for one attempts of chemistry, 1a, love it, or one of three. But what actually happens and has always happened, is that they earn credit for both the tests because they are not the same course. This is not our repeat policy. If they repeated, say, history 200 five, once for a C, a D, once for a C. That's a repeat. Of course, this is just of similar content. And so some colleges were reviewing for some of the courses in similar content or out of sequential order. But not all of the colleges were doing that. And when I say Colleges, I'm talking about in our degree clearance process. So when a student goes their senior year to be eligible for a degree and when they go to graduate college, assistant Dean's office and staff were clearing and verifying that they've met their degree requirements. So there's inconsistency if you're a student who's been in that situation and one college, what is happening is you might be told by that college assistant deans office will, because of these rules, we actually are not going to recognize and credits from your chemistry 1a three attempts, those aren't going to count towards your overall degree credit totals. But in fact, there's those credits do count and the students overall credit. So you have conflicting information of what's being told to the students versus what's been happening on their academic record. Those courses have always say, Our Official Transcript. The other thing that you have going on is that we are clearing thousands of students for their degrees in a very short time period. Our students need to get their credentials as soon as possible. So in 2016, it's really not possible to me annually review thousands of students for degree credentials. We need to be able to review our students for the requirements quickly, efficiently, and, uh, we're their credentials in a timely manner. So we realized when we found that there were 5060 courses, the supply to there was no way any one person who's reviewing a student's record for all 5060 possible courses. So it seemed that some of the colleges who are reviewing, reviewing for what I call the heavy hitters, some of the chemistry, some of the math, some of the biologies, but not everyone was reviewing, say for nutrition, two hundred fifty and four hundred fifty, or political science to 11311. There's an infinite set of possibilities there. So when you have me annual reviews, not only is it hard to review for all of those courses, but human errors introduced. And so again, there was lack of consistency across the colleges in their clearances. If they were checking for this, if they weren't checking for it, and what courses they were even checking for. So hearing their concerns, we've been working on this policy for several years and Undergraduate Studies reviewed it last year. It's a very complicated topic. There's a lot of great opinions about this, this policy, but they weren't ready to make a decision last year, so they reviewed it again this year and how we arrive at the resolution. And some of the discussion that went into it was that it would basically recognize that at the University of Delaware, we do have a strong undeclared University Studies program. We do have students who are changing their majors. And in our various curriculums, it is sometimes necessary to take courses of similar content. I'm an a student, shouldn't be penalized for having taken a Chemistry 103 and then bought into a major that required the chemistry 111. And that if anything else, we wanted to make sure that we didn't have a policy that says credit would not be granted for boat when in fact it always has been. And so the way that the resolution came about in terms of its actual wording in the change of policy would recognize that sometimes students take courses of similar content and that if a major requires a specific course, so if the students major requires Chemistry, 111 will then of course that's going to be the course the student needs to take to meet the major's requirements that the chemistry, one of three in that situation, would simply stay on the student's record as an elective as it always has. But removing that part, that same student doesn't get credit for both because that's simply not true. I do want to say that the committee and our office considered a way to systematically enforced it, right? Our office up. And here's why can't the system do the, this system could do this. There was a contemplation of having this be enforced by the system. And that would be allowing us to code those forces of similar content as equivalent. So saying that math joule one was equivalent to Stat 200 This system would be able to automatically take care of the soul force and there would be no manual reviews. The committee, and I have to say I agree with them, did not feel that there would be consensus between departments that courses of similar content are necessary, the equivalent. So it's one of those, it's, you know, are they the same course or not? Your pet him former NIH. It's your it's a struggling to align. So this was basically a way to not have to have manual reviews to acknowledge that certain courses are required within major requirements, to acknowledge that students do change their majors and that courses they've had similar content would remain as a leftist and yet also not have to try to fight the challenge of having departments agreed that courses are equivalent because there has been quite debate around that before. >> Hey, thank you. >> Is there further discussion? >> Fred, if my calling for chemistry is here and heat is, I would like to ask President appeal to recognize Professor John Burge, I reckon so recognized me will be relieved to hear that i rise in opposition functionally. But i rise in opposition pedagogically, speaking, a brief history when I arrived in 1964. And by the way, I check the archives, disease states or precise. There were two versions of General Chemistry taught, one for majors and non majors. I became our first and still associate chair in 19741984. There were four versions, and we did this for several reasons. One, titrating the needs of our students which are very diverse. A nurse needs a very different course, and a chemical engineer for example. Secondly, unlike in fact, using your list, many of the schools in that here and aspirin institutionalist, we firmly believe in keeping your class size is relatively small. Last fall, for example, we thought almost 3 thousand freshman. Yet our largest lectures were about 200. I can cite school, I will sign a school, Kansas, two lectures to a 1000 data shop in one room at one time. It's very efficient. We now have six versions of freshman chemistry plus three honours versions. I understand your problem and I, I, I fully understand it now, but I must admit, for most of the time since 1984, I operated under a naive assumption that this was being checked, already checked it in chemistry, but obviously it can't be done across the board and the way it could be done. And I agree with your committee. >> Steve would not be the way to handle it. >> I do remain trouble. >> Now. I'll give you just one example and then sit down. >> A student comes to the University of Delaware, having gotten a three in the AP chemistry exam at entitles them to eight credits of 10101102, or lowest level general chemistry sequence. They then change my mind and an entrance, decide they want to major in biology. So they take 103104, they would end up with 16 credits to our graduation. >> All at the freshman general chemistry level. >> In theory, it's possible. Now with this new rule, take 22 credits of organic chemistry at the software level and added all count her graduation. >> No, no one in their right mind would take 23. >> Print shop org. >> Thank you for having nice exalt. >> I understand your problem. >> I'm no longer opposing it because of the reality of life, but it still bothers me pedagogically. >> Thank you. >> Any other discussion? >> Felt some minor friendly amendment that's a second. >> Whereas there's a string is in it close to a side-by-side. >> You do see and me, we'll get it out of there. Oh, it's a friendly amendment. >> So CB. >> Exactly. Okay. >> Yeah. >> David Bellamy, Mathematical Sciences there, there's also a typo. >> I was rushing back here for my class and didn't get a copy of the syllabus to bring with me. >> But there's one of the math courses, has the rubric am ETH, not MAT age. >> That's expecting. >> Maybe, maybe it's about speed and not about me, but I have an iPad on question. >> When I read that, I didn't understand the intent of it, but but you explained that the explanation was that that credit what we given form to grip with courses. I was I was reading it initially as saying that they were going to tighten up this enforcement. >> I guess that it's against my objections are sway, so I won't oppose it, which I was literally like last time. >> So we have some client, we have a number of classes of course, just like chemistry or physics, astronomy, That's sort of fall in this category. But the one I have in mind is we have an introduction to astronomy, which is an introduction to astronomy lab. >> But we have another introduction to astronomy which has a different name, which doesn't have a lab. >> And so the course catalog always instructed you couldn't pick both classes for credit. >> Could we didn't know it. >> But this is presumably not for any major or pedometer. I'm concerned about solder department, but presumably it has something to do with general education breadth requirements. And I don't see in this resolution what the status is in terms of breadth requirements. In other words, when people fulfill their science requirements by taking intuitive physics algebra based in Intro to Physics calc, this or introduction to astronomy without a lab and introduction was traveling with the lab, even though our professional opinion it was typhus, sort of overlap too much to be is everybody here qualified to answer that question? >> Well, I'm I'm a little confused or you talking to breadth requirements. >> And I think that's what I see in this resolution. >> And i see what it does for major require, specific major require. Ok. >> Up. >> And I see what it does in terms of the students getting 224290 underground, right. Okay. But presumably, courses fulfill other purposes too. >> And so the like maybe breadth is going away. But there's sort of, you know, we have courses that, I'm concerned duplicate things, but I know that we've advised students not to pay the same astronomy class twice in slightly different flavors because we felt that the Spirit, right? But I just don't see a I just don't know what the status well, any department I could put restrictions on breath as well. >> I mean, in terms of the number of Physics courses they could count. >> I mean, university requirements are only one course in each area, so that the college coach or college has requirements, right? >> I understand. Understand. >> Sumi Gary, geological sciences. I'm on the undergraduate committee, so I got to hear all the discussion and I just wanted to add a little bit to what Naomi said. One of the things that she did was she looked at all the, all the courses, how many overlaps or how many times it's actually doubled up. >> And it turned out the numbers are really small. >> And it's not that somebody couldn't take two very similar astronomy courses, but that the number of students that have done that, even when you're talking about the chemistry courses, in statistics courses, or the math courses, or, or really small when you think about 17 thousand undergrads. The other has to do with the implementation of it is that we now have degree audit where the students have the remarkable ability to sort of track their own progress. And to the extent that degree audit does not point out that they've taken these courses they're considered She's similar. They don't know necessarily until they go into senator checkout and probably not even then. >> But if somebody at that time says, Oh, by the way, you can only count one of these two. >> They wouldn't know that because it's it's not handled degree od, so thank you. >> So moves there. Anymore discussion, hearing? None. All those in favor passing the resolution, non-GAAP opposed resolution carries. >> So we have unfinished business with Professor replaying, the Chair of the University of Michigan tenure committee. >> This is a revisit tour resolution that we presented last month. >> And at that time it revealed a problem with Spring Break and jump former registrar's office by providing what is listed as the attachment? >> Potentially one I have attention to. That's OK. >> Where he listed what the Spring Break dates were since >> Since spring of 2012 to spring of 2019 and suggested the current wording that the appeal, the Protoself is what here? >> No appeals beyond and the business on the last day of instruction before spring break begins. >> What now what that now seems to do is to compress the time that's between the provost notification, which in the original amendment or the original provision would be March 15th and the candidate having five working days to document their intent to appeal, actually handling the actual meeting where that's listed as being within two weeks. >> So I'm I'm on behalf of the committee. >> I am fine with saying instead of March 15th for the provost recommendation, make that March eighth, which ends up giving us still gives the provost three weeks, instead of only two to God to do that evaluation of all this year, it was 55 of promotion and tenure dossiers. >> And then that would still like the wrong resolution here, the one I had yesterday. >> This doesn't have much market test. >> Merchant 15 March, the theme widget, which is the original one. >> So I'm making, I don't know if I make a friendly and resolution are high, but that's a Appeals is March 15th, and you're saying that the provost decision is March eighth, so that they don't that's compatible. A decides on the eighth and your visor 50, Right? >> That's fine. >> That's missing. >> The first result is missing here. >> Let me go back. >> Yeah, that's right. >> Now. >> That's actually what's on the agenda. >> That's actually fine. >> But there's no March eighth on that because I'm saying it right. >> Yeah. >> First resolved, is the deadline for the provost recommendations be changed to march with teeth? That doesn't that first one talks about a deadline for appeals. There's the first resolve this missing there was some of the previous page. Oh, I think it's that you have the same resolve. The first two results, are they the exact same one? That will look like were the first two results on your slide. >> The Vetter talked about appeals fall right at that first result should rape result that the deadline for the pro those recommendation Be Changed. >> The marched 15 in order to allow for that. >> Here I've got the this is the one on the website. Deadline recommendation be changed, March 15th. >> And then the >> The deadline for the hearing appeals then to business unless the instruction that's the correct. >> Now, your teacher might be caught because I'd been getting feedback that by leaving it at the March 15th and then actually changing that last day because I had it all the way to the end of March. But that was impinging on spring break self. We made the last day of instruction before spring break. That would take care of spring break independent, allow about two weeks. But that's that's actually not into account that the candidate, once they're notified, has five dims To to indicate an intent to appeal. And then the actual appeal, which is the the meeting has to be done within two weeks. So that that that that wording really is we're compressing that end of time. So my suggestion on behalf of the committee is we're OK. Making instead of March 15th. So you want to go up instead of March 15th, make that BY march a. >> What that does is it's we're trying to do two things to you. >> We're trying to give the provost nor time because right now there was only 13 days that through this ad that it's giving one more week, 21 day. >> But it's also giving the Canada in October to indicate their attention to appeal. >> And actually the actual meaning of the appeal, my parliamentarian, is a comment. >> Yeah, we have at least two complications, perhaps more. >> The first complication is the document that is being talked about is not the document that we're actually seeing, right? So there's some confusion about that. But secondly, you have the mover of the motion trying to put substitutions into the motion. >> Now, with this stage, that has to be a formal amendment. >> Right. >> I mean, the stage we are at, the change from the 15th to the a's would require a formal amendment with second so that amending the motion, all that that's actually the status weary. >> And now that this is up there, thank you, Danny. >> Then a Galileo Biological Sciences. >> I'm someone who voiced so some concern to Senator McCain, and that was because if the provost can render his decision as late as March 15th, then on in 2013, that would've given me candidate five working days to file an intent to schedule the meeting and have the meeting because the last resolve clause of this this resolution says that the Provost Office will not hear appeals beyond the end of business. The last day of instruction before spring break, which on 2013, was March 22nd On 2012, and in 2018, it would be March 23rd. So it would give the candidate only six working days to complete that whole process, including intent, scheduling and having carried out this actually, if I could interrupt, sorry. >> So the motion on the floor, the illusion that we have here now. >> And so are you making a formal, well managed change suddenly a different way. >> But I think there are enough complications because also the attachment one would have to be amended because there's wording in that. So I'm wondering if there would be any harm and in making a motion to to have it go back. So all the i's right correctly in the teaser across. >> I think that's a great idea. Dwyer is happening. All in favor thank you for making this go too long. So we have new business. We have two items of new business. And first we have from the executive committee and originally from the ad hoc committee on sexual harassment and assault. Michael, do I present this short? So this resolution has to do with trying to look into the best ways possible to provide education for the faculty around sexual misconduct and the policies. >> So we worked last year to look at different issues and this is sort of one outstanding issue. >> You were all asked to go online and take an online course? >> That was not necessarily based on our recommendation. >> So we were asked by several different entities to look at what the best practices out there and how can we actually bring people up to speed on these issues in a way that we feel is meaningful. >> So that's basically what their dot is there discussion. Yes. >> From an optic standpoint, I really urge you to do this as soon as possible because the students don't understand why only 64% of the faculty have done that. The online training, and from their perspective, it's online training that just gets what the laws are and they just don't they've asked me why don't the faculty support, this staff were at 9798%. And it's hard for me to give the nuance around all of this and I can appreciate the fact that you want to do you want to look at best practices. But it seems to me that doing the online training now and that if there are other best practices, but you know what, my guesses as best practices aren't going to be very different than what's already out there. >> So I guess I would say we're not commenting on the current policies. >> I appreciate that. And I'm just saying that it's a sphere. It's from a student. >> I'm Trudeau, I understand being student focused. >> I'm trying to, when I get these questions, it's really hard to come up with an answer for that. >> And so so so the timeline where I'm says create April. >> And I just want to alert you to the object of this. >> Pleased. >> And I would also say that I don't have an answer to a lot of you are not aware. >> But the, the state is considering passing a bill, HB one, which will mandate faculty, trainee mandate that we're responsible employees. >> I'm not going to come. >> And on that bill. >> But that is out there. That is out there as well. So thank them for their discussion. Does that quiz that I took classes schemas that automates it better. >> So that 64%, goodness, yes, I never got a notice to that effect. >> Guy took it and I never was efficiently and for that I wasn't the Dongguan. >> Well, thank you. Hearing no further discussion. All in favor of the resolution? Opposed is overwhelmingly the last one is we have a recommendation from centred Galileo and a bunch of others, but for the executive committee, and this is basically to make the 3.3.3 document that was was passed a year ago, a year ago. A year ago as a resolution by the, by the center, we're going to make this part of the faculty handbook. And so then you do want to introduce it, I think. >> Sure. >> Wildly so you so so in these CBA than it was there was a letter PA understanding that charged a committee of three from the administration, three from the Faculty Senate, and three from the UP to develop and recommend a policy that provides for meaningful representation of faculty and searches of academic administrators, including Provost. Some themes to ensure a broad range of views that that committee met over this spring of 2014 had nine members, of course, who came up with a great set of recommendations that was presented to the provost. And May 2014, then President target made announced and went over this a little over a year ago at the Senate, she chaired the committee. And these seem to be well-received by senators. And since the purpose of that letter of understanding was to come up and recommend a policy. This is just proposing to make it a policy. And Section two of the faculty handbook on academic program organization. There are other sections that deal with the administration. >> So it seemed like just tacking another one on in section two of the faculty handbook would be a good place to put it. >> And so there's the resolution that just takes the text of the recommendations, the 3.3.3 committee changes in a couple of places where it makes reference to the committee and so forth was not appropriate. Bring the faculty handbook. There were just very minor tweaks or the wording may make it appropriate to fit into the faculty handbook. >> Sarah, further discussion on this resolution hearing? None. All in favor. What it came through. The Executive Committee came from the executive. All in favor all owes to two opposed. And then this way, the last the last item on the agenda is the introduction of new business. So such items may come before the Senate. Does anybody have new business that they would like to introduce? Hearing none. Do I hear a motion for adjournment? I got here a second favorite,
2015-2016/facsen-20160307.mp3
From Joseph Dombroski May 06, 2020
0 plays
0
0 comments
0
You unliked the media.