|Bulletin 26 |
Pages 872 - 886
21 April 2000
|873||Last Call for Richard Roark Award Nominees|
|873||Remaining Senate Meeting|
|873||Upcoming Committee Meeting|
|Messages from Chair|
|874||Invitation for Input on Foreign Language Requirement|
|874-884||College Senate Meeting (11 April)|
|885-886||Input on Foreign Language Requirement|
Correspondence: Becky L. Glass, Department of Sociology, Sturges 122C
E-mail: email@example.com Phone: 245-5336
CALL FOR NOMINATIONS
1999-2000 Richard Roark Award
Shortly after Richard Roark's untimely death in 1970, a group of his friends established an award to honor his memory. Richard's friends described him this way: "Richard was a special kind of human being who valued the humane and ethical above all else. He was a scholar and intellectual who treasured learning and especially books with which, he thought, every person could access the accumulated knowledge of all previous civilizations."
The Richard Roark Award is given to a graduating senior whose scholarship and community service exemplify the qualities that were so important to Richard. The recipient is given a stipend to purchase books, and the recipient's name will be inscribed on a plaque displayed in the MacVittie College Union. Please submit nominations as soon as possible to Becky Glass, Dept. of Sociology, Sturges 122C.
Remaining scheduled Senate Meeting
4:00 pm, Newton 204
Upcoming Committee Meetings
Executive Committee will meet April 20 at 12:45 in South 110.
Faculty Affairs Committee
Both subcommittees will meet April 25 at 4:00 pm. For location, contact Chair Nick Schiavetti
MESSAGES FROM CHAIR
Invitation for Input Relevant to the Discussion of
Foreign Language Requirement
There were several pieces of data provided during the Senate discussion of the foreign language requirement that I am not sure I had the time to properly process during the discussion. In addition, there are data that I think would be useful to know that did not come up. Assuming there are others who feel the same way, I'd like to suggest that campus community members who have data relevant to the foreign language requirement send the information to me by Wed. April 26, and I will print it in Bulletin 27.
I do not want to set a precedent which turns the Senate Bulletin into a Congressional Record; this would have me drawn and quartered by future chairs!
But on this particular issue, which must be addressed under a short timeframe imposed by the Board of Trustees, I think it would be helpful to have time, before the May 2 Senate meeting, to reflect on data to help us arrive at a well-informed conclusion.
Two responses to this request were received in time for this Bulletin and are on
Present: Bailey, Ballard, Bandoni, Bazzett, Bosch, S., Brennan, Broikou, , Bushnell, Cleeton, Cylke, Dahl, Davies, Dixon, Ferrell, Freeman, Glass, Gohlman, Greenfield, Gridley, Gu, Hon, Iyer, Jones, Joshi, Kirsh, Koch, Landes, Leary, Levison, Lima, Lovett, McEwen, Metz, Miller, Mohan, Morse, Nicodemi, Over, Pacheco, Putman, Salmon, Sancilio, Schacht, Schiavetti, Stolee, Sullivan, Tang, Vasiliev, Waddy , Wallace, West, Belois, Bienvenue, Carney, Coleman, Falk, Hahn, Happ, Haskins, Kupper, LaFountain, Lee, Lobsinger, Pacella, Spilman, Stellrecht, Thomas
Call To Order: Chair B. Glass called the meeting to order at 4:05 p.m.
Adoption of Agenda: The agenda was approved as printed on pp. 794-798 of the Senate Bulletin.
Approval of Minutes: Minutes of the Senate Meeting held on March 28, 2000, were moved, seconded, and unanimously approved as printed on Bulletin pp. 798-806.
Minutes of the Senate Meeting held on April 4, 2000, printed on Bulletin pp. 806-817, were moved and seconded. R. McEwen presented the following proposals to amend the minutes:
I am proposing that the College Senate Meeting Minutes of April 4 be amended so that they more accurately reflect the content of the remarks made by Foreign Languages and Literatures faculty members. First, on page 813, 2nd paragraph, where it reads: R. McEwen noted that the Foreign Language department was not made aware of the amendment before today." I am proposing that this sentence be revised to say: "R. McEwen expressed her strong concern with the manner in which she, the Foreign Languages and Literatures department senator, was not informed of the proposal that was going to be brought to the floor by B. Joshi. She said she was informed of this by a third party 2.5 hours before the meeting."
Second, on page 814, 3rd paragraph, where it reads: "B. Evans stated her personal opposition to having 102 as the language requirement. However, she also expressed opposition to a 'proficiency' requirement, which is hard to define." Beverly has confirmed that she did NOT express opposition to a "proficiency requirement." What she did say was that, "She, personally, did not favor having a language requirement. In a separate statement/sentence, she then highlighted the difficulties inherent in defining 'proficiency'." Probably in the interest of concision, the Minutes conflated two separate ideas that she expressed. The result does not reflect correctly the content of her two separate observations.
Next, again on page 814, last paragraph, I propose that the words "intellectual meltdown" be struck and replaced by an expression such as "some confusion ensued". Likewise, on the following page 815, 3rd paragraph, I propose to strike the word "battered" to be replaced by a more dispassionate term such as "defeated".
As a point of order, B. Gohlman noted that minutes can be amended to correct factual errors but not to provide interpretations of what happened. R. McEwen responded that the statements about "intellectual meltdown" and "battered motion" were examples of poetic license that could also be considered interpretations. She added that the words "Faculty Member" in all capitals after G. Hartvigsen's name represented another example of an interpretative action from the Secretary. She argued that if there is not going to be any interpretative or poetic license in guiding the writing of these minutes, then either we don't have any poetic license such as "intellectual meltdown" or we apply it across the board. She expressed concern that the level of poetic license used in describing one department's input is not applied across the board.
K. Cylke spoke against the last two proposals to amend the minutes. He thanked the Secretary for trying to record as accurately as possible the proceedings of an extraordinarily lengthy and complicated Senate meeting. He expressed appreciation for the brief levity introduced in the minutes with such phrases as "intellectual meltdown". He noted that the phrases made him smile as he waded through a reading of the minutes, and he again offered his thanks.
B. Glass asked for clarification of the point of order, and she asked whether the words "faculty member" could be deleted. R. McEwen pointed out that nowhere else in the minutes are faculty members identified. B. Gohlman noted that the statement was of course a fact. R. McEwen asked that the term either be deleted, or that some reference be made to the fact that not everyone is perfect and other people do make mistakes.
B. Glass stated that the first two amendments and the amendment to omit "faculty member" were acceptable according to Roberts' Rules of Order. The remaining concerns and comments will be reflected in the minutes of the current meeting.
B. Dixon asked whether a second was needed to amend the minutes, and B. Gohlman responded that they are not. With no further discussion, the minutes as amended were passed with 5 abstentions.
Chair’s Report (B. Glass): B. Glass reported on three items:
Provost’s Report (B. Dixon): No report.
Treasurer’s Report (M. Mohan): No report.
University Faculty Senator’s Report (E. Wallace): No report.
Central Council (A. Gridley): A. Gridley reported that elections for student positions are coming up April 18th. Positions to be filled include all Student Association Executive Board positions, Central Council, College Council, CAS board representatives and student senator representatives. There is currently no official candidate for A. Gridley's position. Interested students are encouraged to talk to her about the position.
Undergraduate Curriculum (T. Bazzett): On behalf of UCC, T. Bazzett moved the following proposals for Second Reading. Each proposal was seconded by J. Bushnell. Discussion and votes are indicated in italics after each proposal.
Communicative Disorders & Sciences:Course Revision: CDSc 228 title description change (p. 682), passed unanimously.
New Course: CDSc 310 Literacy Development (pp. 683-687), passed unanimously.
Major Program Revision: Add CDSc 310 to major (pp. 688-689), passed unanimously.School of Education: New Courses: Intd 376 Advanced Mathematics Topics for Early Childhood and Childhood Education (pp. 690-694), passed with one abstention.
Curr 320 The Arts and Career Education in the Community (pp. 695-702), passed with 5 against, 1 abstention, and the remainder in favor.
Course Revisions: Intd 203 Social Foundations of American Education (p. 703), passed with one abstention.
Curr 213 Reading and Writing Processes (p. 704), passed with one abstention.
Educ 214 Dimensions of Teaching and Inquiry (p. 705), passed with one abstention.
Curr 313 Classroom Reading and Literature Programs (p. 706), passed with one abstention.
Curr 316 Teaching Science and Mathematics to Children (p. 707), passed with 2 against, 1 abstention, and the remainder in favor.
Curr 317 Social Studies and Curriculum Integration (p. 708), passed with one abstention.
SpEd 319 Diversity and Inclusion in Classrooms (p. 709), passed with one abstention.
Educ 326 Classroom Management in the Elem. School (p. 710), passed with 3 against, 1 abstention, and the remainder for the proposal.
Educ 354 Family and Community (p. 711), passed with one against, one abstention, and the remainder for the proposal.
SpEd 231 Introduction to Special Education (p. 712), passed with one abstention.
SpEd 234 Instructional Strategies and Inquiry in Special Education (p. 713), passed with one abstention.
SpEd 382 Assessment Strategies and Prescriptive Teaching for Students with Disabilities (p. 714), passed with one abstention.
SpEd 383 Special Education Classroom Management Skills (p. 715), passed with one abstention.
SpEd 385 Team Approaches to Education of Students with Disabilities (p. 716), passed with one abstention.
ECEd 351 The Teaching of Young Children (p. 717), passed with one abstention.
ECEd 352 Introduction to Early Childhood Education (p. 718), passed with one abstention.
ECEd 353 Curriculum Development for Young Children (p. 719), passed with one abstention.
ECEd 355 Diversity and Inclusion in EC Classrooms (B-Gr 3) (p. 720), passed with one abstention.
H&PE 350 Health and Safety Issues in the Schools (p. 721), passed with one abstention.
ECEd/Educ 331 Student Teaching–Primary (p. 722), passed with one abstention.
Educ 332 Student Teaching–Intermediate (p. 723), passed with one abstention.
ECEd 333 Student Teaching–Early Childhood (p. 723), passed with one abstention.
SpEd 391 Student Teaching–Special Education Primary or Intermediate (p. 723), passed with one abstention.
Program Revisions:Early Childhood Education major (pp. 724-734). Discussion: K. Hahn made the following statement: "I realize that the education programs of Geneseo are vital for its popularity amongst prospective students. And it's commendable to attempt to provide a program that entails the most comprehensive education of teachers possible. But Geneseo is, first and foremost, a liberal arts university. And if a liberal arts education consists of enculturing the mind and soul through various academic subjects, then these programs fail to allow for a comprehensive liberal arts education. These programs require extensive coursework in education and as a consequence, allow for only sparse numbers of elective classes. Core courses and concentration courses simply aren't sufficient as the sole constituents of a liberal arts education. A greater balance between liberal arts and teacher education is warranted in these programs." With no further discussion, the motion passed with 6 against, 9 abstentions, and the remainder in favor of the proposal for the Early Childhood Education major. B.A. or B.S. in Liberal Arts with Certification in Early Childhood Education (pp. 735-739), passed with 7 against, 7 abstentions, and the remainder in favor.
Childhood Education major (pp. 740-749), passed with 9 against, 7 abstentions, and the remainder in favor of the proposal.
B.A. or B.S. in Liberal Arts with Certification in Childhood Education (pp. 750-754), passed with 7 against, 7 abstentions, and the remainder in favor of the proposal.
Childhood Education (with Special Education added) major (pp. 755-765), passed with 9 against, 8 abstentions, and the remainder in favor of the proposal.
Changes in Concentrations (pp. 766-771), passed with 2 abstentions.On behalf of UCC, T. Bazzett moved the following proposals for First Reading. Proposals were bundled by department and type of proposal, with the stipulation that any individual proposal could be "unbundled" for separate discussion. Each proposal was seconded by J. Bushnell. Discussion and votes are indicated in italics after each proposal.
First ReadingsSchool of Business Revision of Major: Accounting - Add Mgmt 331 & Mgmt 390 and delete Csci 104 & 300-level Accounting elective (pp. 821-822), passed unanimously. Interdisciplinary Revision of Minor: International Relations - Addition and deletion of courses (pp. 823-824), passed unanimously. Honors Program New Course: INTR 393 Honors Thesis in International Relations (pp. 825-826), passed unanimously. Interdisciplinary New Course: INTD 120 Urban Field Experience (pp. 827-828), passed unanimously.
Program Revision: Urban Studies - Add INTD 120 as elective (p. 828), passed unanimously.Philosophy Course Revisions: M/ PHIL 202 World Religions & Contemporary Issues: Revised from PHIL 118 M/Comparative Religion and cross-listed as PLSC 202 (pp. 829-833). T. Bazzett reported that both the Multicultural Core Committee and UCC have approved the addition of this course to the M/ Core. J. Lovett asked whether the cross-listing was being removed or added, and S. Bailey reported that the cross-listing is part of the current proposal. The proposal passed unanimously. Art History
Course Revisions: The bundled proposals for course revisions in Art History passed unanimously, with the following courses included: [Courses listed by proposed new titles]ARTH 201 Ancient to Byzantine Art: Religion & Philosophy (3000-c.600 BC) (p. 834)
ARTH 202 Crusaders, Saints and Sinners: Art and Spirituality in Medieval Europe (500-1400) (p. 835)
ARTH 203 Renaissance Europe: Rebirth of Classical Culture (1300-1480) (p. 836)
Number, title and description change from ARTH 382 Northern Renaissance to ARTH 213 High Renaissance and Mannerism in Europe (1480-1600) (p. 837)
ARTH 284 Asian Art: The Spiritual Traditions of India, China, and Japan (p. 838)
ARTH 278 F/ Nineteenth Century European Art from the French Revolution to the Post-Impressionists: The Spectacle of Modernism (p. 839)
ARTH 287 F/Avant-Garde Modernism (1900-1950):Art on the Edge (p. 840)
ARTH 300 Major Artists and Issues (subtitle in Art History) (p. 841)
ARTH 384 The Age of Rembrandt: Baroque Art in Italy, Spain, France, and The Netherlands (1600-1750) (p. 842)
ARTH 387 Art History Seminar: Methods & Theory (p. 843)New Course: ARTH 282 From Spain to the Americas: Hispanic Art and Culture (1400-Contemporary) (pp. 844-847), passed unanimously.
New Course: ARTH 305 Jesus Christ and the Virgin Mary in Italian and Northern Renaissance Art (pp. 848-851), passed unanimously.Revision of Minor: Changes in requirements (p. 852), passed unanimously.
Revision of Major: Changes in requirements (pp. 853-854), passed unanim.
New Course: ARTS 387 Senior Studio Seminar (pp. 855-860), passed unanimously.
Revision of Major: Add ARTS 387 as requirement (pp. 861-862), passed unanimously.
Fine Arts Core: The following proposals for F/ core credit were passed unanimously:
ARTS 205 Calligraphy (p. 863)
ARTS 225 Watercolor I (p. 863)
MUSC 222 Stage Musicals (p. 863)
THEA 204 Asian Theater Survey (p. 863)Undergraduate Academic Policies, Core, and Review (B. Gohlman): The Policy Committee moved the following for Second Readings.
Second Reading: Motion: To accept the Pre-major Policies for Admission to the E.C. Shear School of Education, as printed in the Senate Bulletin on page 775 (See discussions pp. 624-626 and 772-775, and 811). The motion was seconded by J. Bushnell. With no further discussion, the motion passed unanimously. The policy reads as follows:Admission to the Ella Cline Shear School of Education:
Pre-Major Policies: Students entering the College as Freshmen and seeking certification in Early Childhood Education, Childhood Education, or Childhood/Special Education are in a pre-major status. To be admitted to the Early Childhood, Childhood, or Childhood/Special Education programs, Freshman pre-majors must:
Motion #1: The College Senate shall renew the present SOFI process for one (1) year using the same form while next year's Faculty Affairs Committee continues to evaluate the form question. (See Bulletin pp. 658 and 784)
J. Bushnell seconded the motion. Discussion: C. Leary asked about the meaning of the last two words of the motion. C. Dahl noted that the phrase could mean either evaluating the questions ON the form, or the question OF the form. He suggested revising the phrase to clarify the intent of the motion. N. Schiavetti agreed that dropping the word "question" would clarify the statement and accepted the change as an editorial comment. B. Joshi suggested adding the word "SOFI" before the word "form", and this change also was accepted as an editorial comment. The revised motion read:
The College Senate shall renew the present SOFI process for one (1) year using the same form while next year's Faculty Affairs Committee continues to evaluate the SOFI form.
With no further discussion, the edited motion passed unanimously.
Motion #2: The present SOFI form shall include in the top section of the front page the following statement: (See Bulletin pp. 658 and 785)
"Numerical ratings and comments from the SOFI forms provide important feedback for:
** renewal, continuing appointment, and promotion decisions concerning
** improvement of the instructor's teaching effectiveness
** student course choices
NB: Instructors do not receive the SOFI numerical ratings or comments until AFTER they turn in the final grades for the course."
J. Bushnell seconded the motion. Discussion: A brief discussion of the meaning of "NB" and of the need for a Latin requirement ensued. B. Joshi asked about the intent of the motion, stating his opposition to the motion if it is intended to influence SOFI ratings. He also noted that the form will be revised next year, and that this change could also be made then if necessary. N. Schiavetti responded that the intent of the motion is to make uniform the information given to students when they complete the SOFI forms. At present, some faculty read to the class from the information provided by J. McNally (on the blue form), but some faculty do not. The goal of adding the information to the form is to make sure all students receive the information to help them understand the seriousness of the process. A. Gu, in reference to the section about when faculty get the SOFI results, pointed out that faculty would prefer to get the results sooner than they do (still after the course grades are turned in) to make better use of the feedback. Provost Dixon made a note to investigate ways of working toward this end.
B. Joshi pointed out that the SOFI comments do not go to anyone other than the instructor unless the instructor chooses to send them to administrative committees. He therefore moved an amendment to the motion to remove the word "comments". J. Lovett seconded the motion. In discussion, R. Vasiliev spoke against the amendment. She noted that comments are often used in personnel decisions. Furthermore, if faculty submit any comments they are told they must submit all comments from a class. She therefore advocated keeping the word "comments" in the information statement. She added that these words have previously been provided on the blue form as information for students. K. Cylke added that practice varies widely across the campus regarding submission of comments to personnel committees. Some departments require that the comments be submitted. He echoed the view that the statement provided to students for the last five years should be the one that is included on the SOFI now. B. Gohlman pointed out that the SOFI comments are not available to students, who therefore could not make "course choices" based on them. He suggested that the spirit of B. Joshi's amendment could be captured by changing the wording to "numerical ratings AND/OR comments." B. Joshi reiterated that the comments on the SOFIs are sent to others only at the discretion of the instructor. He and J. Lovett accepted B. Gohlman's suggestion as a substitute for the motion to amend.
B. Haskins and other students noted that SOFI comments do make a difference in students' course choices when they have an opportunity to see them. Many people spoke. B. Glass wielded her gavel and called for order. B. Glass asked where and how SOFI comments were made available to students. B. Haskins replied that her experience has been that professors will show their SOFI comments to students if asked.
P. Schacht suggested that many administrative/personnel committees use ONLY comments, rather than any numerical ratings from SOFIs. He suggested another change in wording might be best. S. Iyer spoke against the amendment, noting that it is optional for instructors to turn in both ratings and comments to personnel committees. A. Gridley also voiced opposition to the amendment because the original words of the motion are those that have been used on the blue form for the last five years. J. F. Morse suggested that faculty could simply be advised to read the blue form aloud to classes. Several Senators noted that this advice is currently given, but not uniformly followed. With no other discussion, the amendment to add the words "AND/OR" to the motion failed to pass, with 19 votes in favor, 35 against, and 3 abstentions.
Discussion returned to the original motion. P. Schacht moved to amend the motion by striking the words "provide important feedback" with the words "may be used". M. Stolee seconded the motion. H. Waddy voiced opposition to the amendment because the wording was not in a positive form, and because it might serve to avoid the issue of the important uses made of the SOFI results. R. Vasiliev also opposed the amendment, arguing that we are not trying to change the form right now, but instead are attempting to make sure all students get the same information. With no further discussion, the amendment to change "provide important feedback" to "may be used" was defeated, with 6 votes in favor, 51 against, and 2 abstentions.
S. West spoke against the original motion, arguing that it accomplishes nothing other than costing the college money to replace existing stock of SOFI forms, perhaps for only one year. B. Glass asked whether there were in fact stockpiles of old forms that would go unused. N. Schiavetti replied that J. McNally orders the SOFI forms on a year-by-year basis. B. Haskins spoke in favor of the motion, noting that professors are currently asked to read the information to students, but most do not. B. Falk added that research has shown that most students are not given the information on the blue form at the time SOFIs are administered. C. Leary asked about the source and nature of this research, specifically questioning whether it might be anecdotal evidence. B. Falk responded that this information had been collected through student surveys conducted by FAC during the past year. M. Lima added that the information was gathered through the SOFI forums and meetings with Central Council. C. Leary asked the FAC chair for clarification about the nature of these surveys, noting that surveys of people who attended the SOFI forums or of Central Council probably constitute biased sampling. He asked if any random samples had been surveyed. N. Schiavetti replied that no random sampling had been used.
B. Gohlman called the question. The motion to call the question passed with 4 against and no abstentions. The motion to add the "blue form" information to the front of the SOFI form passed with many votes in favor and a few against.
Student Affairs (E. Crosby): No report.
Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 5:07.
Joan C. Ballard
Secretary of the College Senate