Senate
I. Call to
Order
The meeting was called to
order at
II. Approval of Minutes
Dr. Williams read the
III. Old Business
Dr. Williams had discussed these positions with most
people before the meeting. A call for
the vote on the individuals or the group was done.
A.
Election of Chairs of Senate Standing Committees
Academic Affairs = Michel Demanche
Admissions =
Ad Hoc Diversity = Katherine (Kat) Harting
Ad Hoc Parking = Dean Coolidge
Ad Hoc Promotion and Tenure = Ibibia
Dabipi
Athletics =
Campus Security = Hermetta Hudson
Faculty Grievances =
IT = Ron Levy
Library = Kim Poole
Physical Plant= Norman Billie
Student Concerns=
Tenure and Promotions=
Several
committees were left without chairs. Dr.
Mollett called for a vote on the motion that the senate approves the indicated
persons. These persons were selected by
a unanimous “Aye” (=yes) vote. There
were no “Nay” (=no) votes and no “abstentions”.
Question – What about the members of the
committee? Response= the chairs go out
and collect members that are faculty and not on the senate. The chairs of the committees must be on
members of the Faculty Senate.
Dr.
Williams stated he thought the constitution indicated this.
Captain Levy indicated his situation of being
a chair before he was a member.
Dr. Ali Eydgahi stated that even the
chairs do not have to be members of the senate.
Dr.
Mollett had a problem with this and that the constitution was silent on this
matter.
Dr. Williams stated that it was his
impression that the function of choosing the members of the committees was left
up to the chairs because this is the way it has always been done.
Dr. Mollett made a motion that an e-mail
notification be sent out to all faculty and staff about the needs of the
committees and let people chose. Captain Levy amended the wording of the motion
to include all eligible persons in the system.
This motion was seconded by Dr. Bass.
Dr. Williams said the motion was accepted
and a vote was taken. This motions was
accepted by an unanimous “Aye” vote. Dr.
Williams would send the e-mail.
Dr. Williams noted other committees (see
above list) that have no chairs.
Dr. Gupta noted that there were no student
senators. A suggestion was made to
contact the SGA. Dr. Williams said he
had and would do so again.
III.
Committee Reports:
There
were none because the chairs had just been selected in this meeting.
IV. Old
Business
‘Thank
You Dr. Williams, with this opportunity to explain why we had published in the
catalogue a change in the incomplete policy. I must be honest with you, when I first
arrived here, and I read the approved policy, I said to someone “this must be
an error”. I had misinterpreted the fact that that was the policy. I thought that was an error and not the
approved policy. And the person said to me (it is irrelevant who it is), “Oh,
yeah, well we should just go into admissions and change it”. Well, I naively went ahead and changed it. But,
because I assumed because of
the number of universities where I have worked and attended that no student
would be awarded a grade of a “W” unless they actually withdrew from a class
that an “I” would never be replaced by a “W”.
Well, I was wrong. And so, what I
want to do is to correct that mistake by resubmitting to this body and also to
the faculty senate a proposal to change our current policy. But before I do that, I would like to know
whether there is anyone here who knows the motivation for originally
establishing and approving a policy that would allow a student’s grade to be changed
from and “I” to a “W” as opposed to an “I “and a “F” if in fact that student
never made any attempt to complete the work that was originally assigned in the
course. My position and my commitment to
shared governance is one in which I am
will to publish in our next catalogue, what ever policy the faculty decide is
the appropriate one for our students here at UMES. Irrespective of the number of universities
where I have worked and I have attended and what I have seen and read and heard,
that’s irrelevant. Now, thinking about
it, there must have been a reason for having a policy like that in the first
place. It would give me a chance to
review that reason and for all of us to reflect on it and if we want to keep it
that way, we can just return to the published policy that I found when I can
here, or we can get the policy that is now printed in the catalogue officially
approved so that it indeed will be the policy that we will use.”
Comments:
Dr. Chapin: I think you are going to have difficulty
finding a reason, when I came here in 1977, it was already the policy. And I do know
that Dr. Hytche had taken over as leader of the campus several years before and
that this was the policy before he took over.
Unless we have people here who have been here are very, very, long time,
and the answer you are going to get is “because that is the way we have always
done it.” It is not something that any
of us, as far as I know, were involved in the creating of.
Dr.
Vaughn-Cooke: OK. You have any more comments? Ok, I’ll recognize you in a minute, Dr.
Mollett. I think that in spite of the
fact, that I mistakenly made the change without getting it approved thinking
that it was an error, but something good will come out of it by allowing us to
revisit the policy and determine
whether or not we want to continue it.
That is the faculty option. As I
said, I have no intentions of making a unilateral decision about that
policy. That was certainly a
misinterpretation on my part and I am ready to stand and correct it. But, I also like the idea that we are being
forced to revisit and to discuss it.
Dr. Mollett: I am
in total agreement with Dr. Chapin, but I did ask when I first came here about
this policy and it was unusual to me.
And I don’t remember who I heard this from whether it was from Dr. Ellis
or Dr. Neuville, The way it was explained to me was that we have a high
percentage of “stop-out” students who come and for various reasons they have to
leave. Sometimes they essentially are
leaving for personal reasons or financial reasons and sometimes they end up
with incompletes. Sometimes it is a fair
progression of time before they come back. And it was explained to me that the motivation
for doing this was so that they were not further penalized. That was the only explanation that I
ever received. It was given to me in a
conversation and not in a formal form or anything like that, but I bet neither
one remembers ever saying that to me because I don’t even remember which one
told me. Dr. Chapin had you ever heard
that?
Dr. Chapin: No,
I had not heard that one.
Dr. Gupta: In the past we have
had policies that were not always followed.
Certainly, I am not opposed to a revisiting of this policy. However, there could be a problem with
graduate students. The “I” to a “W”
would hurt graduate students.
Dr. Bass: I think that
the rationale of the policy has been lost to antiquity and the problem is How
do We Fix it now. How does the senate
what to handle this now. Do we want a
committee, discussion; receive input from people, or what?
Dr. Gupta: Send the issue to
the Faculty Assembly (F.A).
Dr. Williams: The chair of the
Faculty Assembly is here present. I concur with Dr. Gupta that the matter be
sent to the FA first for their input and any discussion. Will you do this, Dr. Chapin? As chair, I will refer this matter to you and
you can have fun with this next week.
Thank you, Dr. Vaughn-Cooke.
Dr. Williams: Is there any more
old business to be discussed at this time?
Dr. Williams: How
about new business?
V. New Business:
Dr. DeViney : General
Studies: The departments have been
requested to put together a new curriculum for General Studies and I think it
is to follow the same procedure. Each department is to have a General Studies
major option.
Dr. Williams: I don’t know
anything about that. Would Academic
Affairs know about that?
Dr. Vaughn-Cooke: Made a
recommendation for students seeking a General Studies degree must have an area
of concentration. This was to help with
advising, not a program change. I will consult with the counseling group
tomorrow. If there is a program change,
it could have to be approved by the appropriate bodies. We certainly want to
continue the program.
Dr.
Bass: The policy as it stands now is that students
who are in the General Studies Curriculum at this time, still need to select a department
in which they are to concentration. And
the requirements in that department would be the same in the new paradigm?
Dr. Vaughn-Cooke: Absolutely.
Dr. Bass: In essence, there has been no program change.
Dr. Vaughn-Cooke: No program change, only advising change. The students are to be advised in the
department of their concentration in which they are matriculating.
Captain Levy: I don’t think there was a program change, but last
spring, Dr. Showell-Cherry did ask all departments to send in a sample or
recommended course list of their areas of concentration. But I don’t that that was to be an official curriculum
program requirement until it was approved.
That may be what we are talking about now.
Dr. Vaughn-Cooke: No. Right, because what she was perfecting was what
was already established in that department.
Captain Levy: Because there is nothing really established by
departments, it just said that if you are in General Studies, you just should
have X number of lower level courses and X number of upper level courses in
that major. There was nothing every specified as to the courses you need to
take.
Dr. Vaughn-Cooke: I think she
wanted was a recommended sequence of courses in each department that that
student must have and the departments must set this.
Captain Levy: That would
require some improvements.
Dr. Williams: Dr. DeViney,
you still have the floor.
Dr. Chapin: Ok, we are
on to other announcements?
Dr. Williams: Not quite yet.
Are their any other questions based on this discussion? Hearing none, Is
there any other new business that needs to be discussed?
Dr. Eydgahi: We need to get faculty, students, and
administrators to these meetings because we are facing some very important
issues that affect the entire community.
How can we address this?
Dr. Williams: Well, short of sending out the constabulary to
compel people to come, I have been in
touch with the staff and students and to some extent with the administrators,
and their enthusiasm is somewhat lacking.
I will try again. I am not going
to stand over them with a club and say, hey, you got to be there. We do the
best we can.
Dr. Chapin: I guess that
I am the transition into the announcements. First, all while Dr. Vaughn-Cooke is here, I wanted
to announce that we indeed do have a new Faculty Handbook that through her
continued works have gotten the final contents and now it needs to be
proof-read. The reason I make this announcement is that when this comes out,
all of you need to read it very carefully, particularly where it may affect
you. There are probably policies that
were passed at various times and are no longer appropriate or not the thing
that we are doing. Since this will come out on ACD, then we need to make sure
everything is correct.
The
other thing I want to talk about is the question of Civility.
1. Students more civil than ever in dealing with issues
2. Need more co-operation
3. Problem not just student and faculty, but
administrators “noticed a yelling incident over the phone by administrators”.
4. Pleaded for co-operation and understanding
5. This encourages students to become less civil.
6. If we expect our students to respect each other, then
so should we.
Dr. Williams: Thank
you. Are there any other announcements?
VI. Announcements:
X. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at
Recorded and Submitted by:
Dr. Jeurel Singleton (new
Secretary of Senate)