GRADUATE FACULTY MEETING
Minutes of the Meeting
The meeting was called to order
by Dean Judith Walker de Felix at
I. Minutes
Teresa Guess moved to accept the minutes as distributed, Mary Cooper seconded and the Faculty approved the motion unanimously.
II. Graduate Faculty Nominating Committee – Teresa Guess
The committee presented the following nominees to serve on the 2004-06 Graduate Council:
Zuleyma Tang-Martinez, Math/Natural Sciences
__________________, Social Sciences
Betty LaFrance, Fine Arts
Elisha Chambers, Education
Peggy Ellis, Nursing
__________________, Optometry
The committee requested nominees from the floor for the following unfilled positions from Social Sciences and Optometry on Graduate Council. Drs. David Curry and Carol Peck respectively were selected to serve.
The slate of nominees recommended by the committee with the additions from the floor was approved unanimously by the Faculty.
As the committee had no nominee for the Graduate Faculty Secretary, nominations were requested from the floor. Dr. Paulette Isaac was nominated and the Faculty approved her nomination unanimously.
III. Proposed Changes to
The proposed policy changes are
part of a project to change the Graduate Rules and Regulations to policies. The
Graduate Council, graduate directors, and staff of the
The Dean distributed a document comparing the current Rules and Regulations and
the proposed policy statements. Policy changes that require Graduate Faculty approval
are noted in the right-hand column. Specifically, these include the following
sections:
4.8. Term Limits.
Rationale: To provide accountability and support practices in some units. Revised wording from previous section 5.1.2:
“Graduate teaching and research assistantships are major institutional investments that cannot be awarded to the same student for an extended period. Units may establish term limits to assure that awards are available to a greater number of students. Such limits shall be specified in the initial appointment letter.”
Discussion:
Some thought it was a good practice
to clarify that units may do
this. Students appreciate knowing ahead
of time how long their funding will last.
Students shouldn’t expect that their funding is indefinite.
Vote:
The Graduate Faculty voted unanimously to approve Council’s motion to change section 4.8.
6.1. Definition of a Graduate Course.
Rationale:
Eliminate "2nd class" departments by omitting the notion of a "graduate department."
Delete wording:
“Departments without graduate programs may offer 5000-level course after the Graduate Council reviews the content, function, and purpose of the course. Such courses shall be reviewed every two years and may be reauthorized.”
Vote:
The Graduate Faculty voted unanimously to approve Council’s motion to delete the above paragraph from section 6.1.
7.2 In-Progress Grades.
Rationale:
Add an option for faculty who want to avoid having to change DLs to grades on dissertations and theses.
New Wording:
When a course extends for more than one term and the student’s performance is deferred until the end of the final term, provisional grades of In-Progress may be assigned in the intervening terms. The In-Progress grade represents progress in a sequential course and indicates that a grade will be assigned at the end of the sequence. In-Progress grades do not count toward earned hours. No credit is awarded or grade points assigned until the sequence is complete and a permanent grade is entered replacing the In-Progress grade(s).
In-Progress grades are left on the
student’s record until the committee and dean of the
Discussion:
The IP grade is similar to other University’s practices. Use of the IP grade would alleviate the current practice of sending letters to student’s employers explaining that a delayed grade would indicate the student is making progress. If a student doesn’t finish the dissertation, the IP grade would remain in effect.
Vote:
The Graduate Faculty voted
unanimously to approve section 7.1. IP grade.
7.8 Probation
Rationale:
Revised wording:
“Failure to make adequate progress
jeopardizes a student’s potential to complete the degree and their financial
aid. To provide students notice of
inadequate progress at the end of each semester, graduate students with a cumulative
GPA below 3.0 in a minimum of nine credit hours are placed on probation. A program may also place a student on
probation if it regards the student’s progress as unsatisfactory.
“If at the end of the probationary semester the cumulative GPA is at least 3.0, the probationary status is removed. A probationary student who fails to raise the cumulative GPA to 3.0 may, on the recommendation of the program, be allowed a second probationary semester. A student is subject to dismissal upon failure to raise the cumulative GPA to 3.0 by the end of the second probationary semester, or at any time a semester or cumulative GPA falls below 3.0.”
Vote:
The Graduate Faculty unanimously
approved Council’s motion to revise 7.8.
7.9. Dismissal
Rationale:
Request for continuation should come from the advisor or graduate director. Provides support to Graduate Directors and facilitates communication among offices.
Revised Wording:
“A student who is on probation for
more than two semesters during his/her program of study will be dismissed,
unless the dean of the
Discussion:
Clarified that students will be dismissed if their GPA falls below 3.00 OR if they are not making satisfactory progress. They can get a second probationary semester. They will be dismissed after they have completed two probationary semesters. It was also clarified that courses taken elsewhere would not count in the GPA for dismissal. Only the Graduate Program Director is notified before the dismissal letter is sent. Is there a problem if a student is on probation and then stops attending? These students would be considered inactive.
Vote:
The Graduate Faculty unanimously
approved Council’s motion to revise 7.9.
3.7 Admission of International Students
Rationale:
E-mail from a colleague requesting that the first sentence, second paragraph of the original version be reinstated in the revised text. The intent was to pull out specific test scores and put them in the ‘procedures’ manual. Concern, like GRE, testing companies don’t like the way we use their scores.
Discussion:
If no minimum score is listed, there could be a flood of applications by those who aren’t qualified.
Normally an international applicant with a score below 550 won’t apply unless they contact the department first. Not listing a minimum score could slow down the application processing time.
The department would get more questions about what the new statement meant (submit scores from an internationally accepted standardized examination of the English language).
Applicants who have been in an English speaking country for 2 of the last 3 years may still not have English proficiency.
Sometimes a score of 550 indicates how may ESL classes the student has taken, not English proficiency.
The Dean will
make sure the application process has the TOEFL standards listed. Revised Wording:
International
students shall meet the requirements for admission to the
Vote: Motion to approve the wording as revised above was approved.
4.2.2 Graduate
Teaching Assistant
Change “GTA assignments shall be restricted to introductory level instruction….” to “…are normally restricted to”
Faculty considered this an editorial change and therefore did not require a vote.
4.3. Tuition
Scholarships
Faculty believes
that the change to this section is not an editorial change and that the wording
“…and availability of funds each year” should be stricken. The Dean will delete the revised wording.
The Faculty voted to approve the revised policies document by a verbal vote instead of the written ballot distributed at the meeting. The new version will be placed on the Graduate School web site.
This summer the dean will work on the handbooks for students and for advisors.
IV. Dean’s Report
The Graduate Program Directors and Graduate Council members prepared a resolution to the Senate on whether faculty get credit for dissertation and thesis work. Establish teaching equivalencies. The policy will average across colleges, not at the individual level. One graduate hour would equate to one and one-half undergraduate credit hours. The resolution will go to the Senate in the fall.
The meeting adjourned at
Respectfully submitted,
Mary Ellen Heckel
on behalf of Paul Speck
Secretary to the Graduate Faculty