May 7, 2007

Once approved, these minutes may be accessed electronically at:
http://fp.arizona.edu/senate/minutes.htm
Visit the faculty governance webpage at:
http://fp.arizona.edu/senate/

 

1.             CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order by Vice Chair of the Faculty Robert P. Mitchell at 3:05 p.m. in the College of Law, Room 139.

Present: Senators Bergsma, Bruce, Conway, Corcoran, Cromwell, Dahlgran, D. Davis, G. Davis, O. Davis, DeSorda, Effken, Estrada, Foley, Green, Howell, Jenkins, Jones, McKee, Mitchell, Mitchneck, Mountford, Mutchler, Neish, Nolan, Pavao-Zuckerman, Pintozzi, Sarid, Schlager, Shelton, Smith, Songer, St. John, Strittmatter and Ulreich. Robert Sankey served as Parliamentarian.

Absent: Senators Aleamoni, Burd, Christenson, Cuello, Cusanovich, Gruener, Hildebrand, Joens, Marchalonis, Murdaugh, Ranger-Moore, Rodl, Ruiz,  San Martin, Sebesta, Silverman, Spece, Sterling, Weinand, Willerton and Witte.

2.             OPEN SESSION

Senator Strittmatter provided background information about the enclosure in today’s Senate packets entitled, “Reconfiguring Undergraduate Education at the University of Arizona: A White Paper” dated March 17, 2007. This document was initially generated over ten years ago by a faculty member and has been updated and reviewed by the faculty advocates group and the Committee of Eleven which is forwarding it to the Faculty Senate. The motivation for the document is most easily seen on the chart showing the percentage of students graduating relative to SAT scores for each of the 33 AAU public institutions and UA. The goals for this white paper were: 1) to improve the UA’s graduation rate without lowering standards; 2) to maintain or increase enrollment; and 3) to recruit and retain the exceptional students. This White Paper is not a prescription for all students or colleges: it is intended to stimulate discussion about how to enhance our undergraduate program.

Senator Jones informed the Senate about a request from a Professor Neil Wollman in Indiana for faculty support, individually and collectively, to address concerns about the ethical social responsibility of several corporations in which TIAA-CREF invests. As Chair of the University Committee on Corporate Relations (UCCR), Senator Jones consulted with former Chair J. D. Garcia and they agreed this request is not within the scope of the UCCR, but he is making the Senate aware of the effort. The website is www.makeTIAA-CREFethical.Oorg and njwollman@manchester.edu is Prof. Wollman’s email address.

3.             REPORTS

3A.          ASUA President Tommy Bruce

ASUA President Tommy Bruce introduced himself and said he and the ASUA look forward to working with the Faculty Senate on a number of initiatives this year. 

3B.          GPSC President Catherine Neish

GPSC President Catherine Neish introduced herself and said she is a PhD candidate from Planetary Science. This year she and the GPSC will continue to work on improving Student Health Insurance offerings, increasing outreach to all graduate students, and organizing students to lobby the state government to finance the universities.
 

3C.          Faculty Officers’ Report

Vice Chair of the Faculty Robert Mitchell welcomed new Senators Judith Effken and Peter Foley, and returning Senator Larry Aleamoni and everyone else to the first Faculty Senate meeting of 2007-08 and called Senators’ attention to the standing committees’ reports in the packets or on their desks. He also pointed out the Senate’s meeting schedule for fall 2007, explaining that the Senate may be meeting in the AHSC Duval Auditorium or in a large amphitheatre-style classroom on the eighth floor of UMC due to the College of Law’s renovation. He reminded Senators of the campus shuttle service and the two large Zone 1 parking lots just west of the Health Sciences complex. Chair Mitchell reported on two items introduced as new business this spring: Senator Green’s request to consider how the Faculty Senate may participate in conversations with the legislators for support for the universities, and Senator Burd’s request to change the Academic Calendar to accommodate college commencement ceremonies without interfering with final exams. The Senate Executive Committee empowered Chair of the Faculty Howell and Vice Chair Mitchell to work on these two issues over the summer and report to the Senate in the fall. Chair Mitchell noted, at Senator Andy Silverman’s request, whose name appears on the ballot for today’s meeting, that Senator Silverman is rarely absent and he has been on sabbatical and working in Washington D.C. this semester but has remained in touch with the Faculty Senate office and has only missed two of the Senate Executive Committee meetings. President Shelton approved the revised Faculty Constitution and Bylaws on April 2 so they are now officially in effect and are posted on the Faculty Governance website. Chair Mitchell said that near the end of today’s session and that a motion(s) will be put forth to establish Faculty Senate task forces to work on general education and undergraduate education and asked that any Senators interested in working on these task forces please sign up on one of the sheets being circulated during today’s meeting. Chair Mitchell presented outgoing Provost George H. Davis with two framed black and white 1930 photographs of Bryce Canyon rock formations. Presiding Officer Mitchell said the faculty officers have genuinely appreciated Provost Davis for his advocacy of shared governance and that he has truly been the “gold standard” among chief academic officers.
 

3D.          Provost’s Report

Provost Davis presented the Faculty Senate with a framed excerpt from his October 2005 essay, The University of Arizona: An Archipelago of Innovation. The passage speaks about shared governance and this item will be housed in the Faculty Center. Provost Davis also thanked the faculty officers for the 1873 antique map of Utah which was presented to him at his retirement ceremony on May 4. He thanked the Senate for the partnerships he has enjoyed with faculty leadership. He said he believes the UA faculty is consistently ahead of the power curve in close communication about important issues. Provost Davis alerted the Senate to the call for decision package proposals. The original draft was for proposals around prescribed themes, but that became too constraining. Instead, the theme of “Growth in Arizona” is one which fits our land grant mission and ABOR’s desires, so Provost Davis asked faculty to give President Shelton their very best ideas in a one- or two-page proposal. The other part of the call is for deans and department heads to alert faculty to the call, and then to put the proposals into a cohesive form and determine if they meet the review criteria described in the strategic plan. The deadline for these two-page proposals is May 21^st. It is hoped that these could be presented to ABOR in August and then in full form in September. Provost Davis just called for faculty recruitment plans to describe ongoing searches and descriptions of start-up costs, salary, renovation. He expects those materials will come forward in early June and Gene Sander will handle the conversations with the deans about these recruitments.

3E.           President Robert N. Shelton

President Shelton joined the Senate in acknowledging the tremendous key eadership role that Provost Davis has held for the past seven years and thanked him in particular for the orientation to the complexities of the University of Arizona these past ten months. President Shelton reflected that there is no higher praise than Chair of the Faculty Howell’s comments at the campus-wide celebration for Provost Davis last Friday, when she reminded everyone that Provost Davis really is a member of the faculty. There is an active search committee now seeking a replacement for this critical position and President Shelton invited Senators to offer suggestions of candidates. President Shelton thanked Senator Strittmatter and the Committee of Eleven for the curriculum proposal in the White Paper on Undergraduate Education and looks forward to today’s discussion for any suggestions to improve our students’ educational experience. President Shelton distributed a summary of the budget cuts in a one-page handout, “UA FY08 Permanent Reductions (Eligible Base Date 1/11/07),” to explain the budget breakdowns. The real work begins now, with the deans’ implementation. President Shelton is optimistic about the legislature’s budget for FY08-09 and is hopeful that the state senate’s budget will be accepted. President Shelton has begun interviewing the three finalists for Director of the UA Alumni Association. President Shelton invited Senator’s suggestions for Commencement speakers for Dec 07 and May 08.  Locally, the UA and the city leaders are making progress on the downtown renovation formerly known as Rio Nuevo. President Shelton said the city understands that whatever involvement UA has with this project, the city will need to build it. He thanked Chair Howell and the Senate for their help individually and collectively over this past year.

4.             QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD FOR AGENDA ITEM 3

Senator O. Davis commented that although differential budget cuts were encouraged, the campus’ perception is that most of the cuts are being implemented as across-the-board. He asked President Shelton to report on the actual breakout at the Senate’s first meeting in the fall. President Shelton agreed to provide this information. He is well aware of the enormous difference between a 2% and a 3% cut. Provost Davis added that the deadline for the proposals for the cuts is May 11 and he hopes that this year the differential approach to budget cuts will prevail among the deans.

Senator Ulreich asked whether the range of 1.5-3% is understood to be a boundary range or are cuts being considered over a larger range? Provost Davis said he is aware of cuts of 10% in some units.

Senator Mountford told President Shelton that in the College of Humanities it has been difficult to acquire clear information regarding the differential cuts among the units. She underscored the importance of shared governance for units to know where they stand with respect to other units, and urged the Provost to release that information to all faculty. Provost Davis concurred that those colleges and departments where the deans and heads are as transparent as possible and encourage open discourse on the nature of the proposed cuts and on the mission and direction of the unit have a much easier time during difficult situations such as budget cuts.

5.                    APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF APRIL 2, 2007

The minutes of April 2, 2007 were approved.

6.                    ELECTIONS FOR COMMITTEE ON CONCILIATION, UNIVERSITY COMMITTEE ON ETHICS AND COMMITMENT, UNIVERSITY HEARING BOARD, THE FACULTY SENATE REPRESENTATIVES TO THE GRIEVANCE CLEARINGHOUSE COMMITTEE, SENATE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, SHARED GOVERNANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE, AND SENATE COMMITTEE ON BUDGET AND STRATEGIC PLANNING (attachment)

The Senate conducted its annual elections for the Committee on Conciliation, University Committee on Ethics and Commitment, University Hearing Board, and the Faculty Senate Elected Representatives to the Grievance Clearinghouse Committee, Senate Executive Committee, Shared Governance Review Committee, and Senate Committee on Budget and Strategic Planning. Votes were cast using written ballots. Parliamentarian Sankey and Secretary Jenkins served as tellers. In accordance with the General Faculty Bylaws, those elected were:

Committee on Conciliation 
Julia Cole
Marc Miller
Veronica Reyes-Escudero                                                  

University Hearing Board
Dale Clifford
Suzanne Westbrook
Dianne J Winslow
Terry Woronov

University Committee on Ethics and Commitment
Mary E Graham
Mark Riley

Faculty Senate Committee on Budget and Strategic Planning
Owen K Davis
William E Conway

Faculty Senate Executive Committee
Andy Silverman

Grievance Clearinghouse Committee
Owen K Davis

Shared Governance Review Committee
Andy Silverman

7.                    APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS FORWARDED AS A SECONDED MOTION BY THE INSTRUCTION AND CURRICULUM POLICY COMMITTEE  (attachment)

The consent agenda items forwarded by the ICPC and detailed at the end of these minutes [Motions 2007/08-1, -2, and -3] were approved unanimously.

8.                    DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON PROPOSED REVISIONS TO TWO CURRICULAR POLICIES:

1) REDUCING CREDIT HOUR RESTRICTIONS ON UNDERGRADUATES IN NON-DEGREE STATUS;

2) GIVING INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS WHO ARE NATIVE SPEAKERS OF LANGUAGES OTHER THAN ENGLISH A NEW OPTION FOR SATISFYING THE FOUNDATIONS-SECOND LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT (attachment)

Presiding Officer Mitchell reminded Senators that these two items come as seconded motions [Motions 2007/08-4 and -5] from the ICPC. Senator Conway called the Senate’s attention to the “ICPC Non-Consent Agenda Items” attachment in their packets. For Item 1 he said, ICPC considered and determined this revision to be consistent with current practice and unanimously supported this policy change. Senator Ulreich questioned why this item was not also included on the ICPC’s Consent Agenda. Senator Conway and Presiding Officer Mitchell explained that the Senate Executive Committee has requested that policy changes never be placed onto a consent agenda, to give the Senate appropriate time for questions or discussion. Motion 2007/08-4 was approved with one abstention. Turning to the second item, Senator Conway explained that the ICPC also considered and unanimously supported this policy change, although they noted that it may be possible for one or two students a year to slip through and not satisfy the language requirement because of this policy change. C. Pardee of the Curriculum Office explained that the number of appeals her office was receiving from academic advisors working with international students whom they believed met the language requirement and should not have to prove it by taking the proficiency exam prompted the UGC and general education committee to review the policy. International students are admitted on the assumption that English is their second language, having passed the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL), so the UGC agreed with this policy change. It was noted, however, that occasionally a foreign student from a country where English is not the primary language has grown up speaking and has been educated only in English. Such a student is actually not proficient in a foreign language yet might slip through this requirement because of passing the TOEFL. One example is Quebec, where French is the language of record, but there are many English-speaking students from Quebec who do not know French. Senator Corcoran questioned whether the fact that some students pass the TOEFL but are not really proficient in English is a concern. C. Pardee responded that the proficiency deficiency is a concern of the writing program, but that issue is not addressed by this proposal. Senator Mountford questioned whether the foreign language departments were consulted. C. Pardee responded that Spanish/Portuguese department is represented on the general education committee and supported this proposal. Senator Conway noted that a faculty member from French/Italian sits on the ICPC and supported it as well.  Motion 2007/08-4 was approved unanimously. 
 

9.                    REPORT FROM THE SENATE INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETIC REPRESENTATIVE (attachment)

Senator Green reminded the Senate that he has been serving on the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee (ICAC) since the Senate elected him to fill this position in the middle of last October. This Committee includes members of the general faculty, the Alumni Association and the ASUA. Intercollegiate Athletics Director Jim Livengood sits as an ex-officio member and former Chair of the Faculty Jory Hancock sits as the President’s appointed Faculty Athletics Representative. The ICAC meets monthly and is chaired by former Dean of Education John Taylor. The Committee is appointed by the University President. ICAC consults with and advises the Athletics Director and the President regarding the intercollegiate athletics program and to ensure compliance with ABOR and NCAA guidelines, rules and policies. A key issue this year is the upcoming NCAA Peer Review and Certification, which requires a self-study document. Senator Green is also serving on the ICAC’s NCAA Athletics Certification Self Study Steering Committee, chaired by Dean Portney of Eller College. There are three sub-committees, Governance and Rules Compliance, Equity and Student-Athlete Well-Being, and Academic Integrity. These sub-committees’ reports are posted at www.arizonaathletics.com/ncaa-self-study . The NCAA Peer Review team will visit UA’s campus November 6-8, 2007. If the Athletics Department meets all standards, it will be reaccredited in early 2008. Senator Green is available to hear any faculty or student concerns about intercollegiate athletics.

10.                 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION: COMMITTEE OF ELEVEN RESOLUTION ON THE UA GENERAL EDUCATION CURRICULUM (attachment)

Committee of Eleven Vice Chair J. D. Garcia advised the Senate that the intent of today’s Committee of Eleven “Resolution on the UA General Education Curriculum,” which was included in the packets, is to engender discussion in the Faculty Senate about the UA’s general education program, which accounts for half of all students’ credits toward a degree. General Education (GEN  ED) is therefore a really important portion of our students’ education, but unfortunately the General Education Committee doesn’t report to the Faculty Senate so there has been very little opportunity for oversight or discussion over the past ten years. The Senate is empowered to speak for the faculty and approve the curriculum and should therefore be engaged in such oversight. The Committee of Eleven has been hearing concerns about the overall quality of the delivery of the GENED program from students, faculty, staff and administrators. The C11 believes that the missing link is assessment of the GENED program. To the C11’s knowledge, there is no assessment of the quality or the efficacy of both the teaching and learning, aside from student popularity. There was a self-study about five years ago involving 400 volunteer students, but the results were not compared to national norms. Two questions involving general education are: “What is being taught?” and “What is being learned?” We can’t really know whether our GENED program is successful in providing students with the breadth of general education that is needed to be successful citizens in the country without assessment.  The Committee of Eleven wants to urge the Senate to establish a task force to review and recommend revisions to the GENED program and report back to the Senate in the fall. Some of the problems noted involve highly specialized, low enrollment “vanity” courses that have been established contrary to the spirit of the original GENED curriculum, and limiting access of more advanced students to higher level courses within major areas. Senators’ questions and comments included: 1) Why not just make a change to the University-wide General Education Committee’s (UWGEC) reporting structure, so that it does report to the Senate? This change is in motion at this time but the Committee of Eleven believes a fresh look is also needed, so that the Senate can be informed by its own Task Force about these important issues. Indeed, the Senate has not taken the initiative to review this substantive portion of the curriculum since the GENED program’s inception. Presiding Officer Mitchell added that the issue of having the UWGEC report to the Senate is an important one, and a Constitution and Bylaws revision will be coming forward to the Senate in the fall, but simply having the UWGEC report to the Senate won’t address these concerns.

Chair Howell recognized Vice Provost for Instruction Jerry Hogle, who administers the General Education Program and oversees the UWGEC, to offer information about GENED the program. Regarding the costs of GENED, Vice Provost Hogle explained that since the new tiered program of GENED began in the Fall of 1998, the University has been spending about $20M annually (excluding faculty salaries) for adjuncts, TA’s, lecturers and graders for hundreds of sessions all over campus. That amount has remained fairly consistent. GENED generates about $45M tuition dollars per year. What has changed, however, is the funding amount provided centrally by All Funds versus the amount provided by the colleges. This change was necessitated by the budget cuts beginning in 2001. General Education courses provide 40% of the student credit hours in 21% of the sections. Dr. Hogle turned to the attachment titled, “Report and Recommendations of the University of Arizona General Education Review Committee 2004-05,” which was presented to the Senate in 2005. He pointed out that many of the concerns the Committee Eleven is forwarding now were made at that time. He has highlighted portions of this report that reflect the C11’s and other concerns, in particular, line 323 which addresses concerns about quality, intensity, and passion [in GENED courses] varying widely. Vice Provost Hogle instructed the Chair of the University-wide General Education Committee (UWGEC), which functions as the Vice Provost for Instruction’s task force on GENED, to address these concerns. He asked UWGEC Chair James Riley to discuss the progress as to how these concerns and recommendations are being addressed and implemented as described in the attachment dated 19 April 2007, “UWGEC Plans and Progress 2006-07 academic Year.” Dr. Riley explained that the committee’s four focus items for this year have been: 1) Create a periodic review process for Tier I and Tier II courses. Dr. Riley said the review process for Tier I is complete and the committee will meet next week about Tier II.  2) Improve the clarity of expected outcomes for GENED and Foundations and clarify outcomes of Tier Strands. This has been incorporated with the Assessment Leadership Team which is addressing outcomes assessment for all of undergraduate courses. 3) Establish a process for investing new faculty into GENED and survey faculty about experiences teaching GENED. This issue is being addressed by the UWGEC Communications and Promotion Subcommittee. 4) In consultation with the Honors College and the Undergraduate Council, etc., work out a clearly demarcated “Honors Track” in GENED. The UWGEC passed a motion to recommend that Honors students be allowed to substitute Tier II classes for Tier I in all strands. Dr. Riley said that three remaining concerns will be addressed more in the coming year with assessment addressed specifically in Attachment “B” of this document. He added that committee members agreed that the UWGEC should also be brought under the Faculty Senate. Vice Provost Hogle asked whether another review is really necessary, given that there was already a review of GENED with review committee members from both the Committee of Eleven and the Senate as well as students. He also explained that the student outcomes assessment plan calls for sampling students at the end of their GENED experience, typically using embedded assessment tools in Tier II courses. 

Dr. J.D. Garcia told Senators that the Committee of Eleven did host a meeting with Vice Provost Hogle and UWGEC Chair Riley this spring, after which C11 members decided it is very important for the Senate to have an independent review of GENED. Senators’ comments and questions included: 1) How was the review committee constituted? Vice Provost Hogle appointed the members. 2) Having UWGEC review itself is like sending a rabbit to buy carrots. How GENED is delivering the program is a University-wide problem. If the Senate decides to create a Task Force, it is expected to consult and work with the UWGEC. Senator Songer moved [Motion 2007/08-6] to establish a Senate Task Force on General Education for the purpose of working in consultation with the University-wide General Education Committee to accomplish the following aims:

        Review existing UWGEC reports, including evaluations of the current course offerings
        Design appropriate mechanisms to measure and ensure quality and cost effectiveness of the UWGEC
        Recommend actions to provide greater access to and choice of general education course offerings
        Review current rules and procedures on the substitution of General Education courses, and make recommendations to optimize student learning opportunities

Task Force Composition:
        The task force will include representation from all colleges with undergraduate enrollment as well as ASUA (12-15 members)
        One-fourth of the total membership will be from the Faculty Senate
        The task force Chair will be a faculty senator and both the membership and the Chair will be appointed by the Presiding Officer of the Faculty Senate
        At least two task force members will be UWGEC members

Activity Timeline:
        First orientation meeting will be convened by end of May, 2007
        Six, 2-hour meetings (every other week during fall semester)
        Report to Faculty Senate, December, 2007. 

Senator and C11 member Strittmatter seconded the motion and remarked that within the Committee of Eleven, the concern is whether the spirit of general education is truly embodied in the current GENED program with so many “specialist” courses, and does the current GENED program make the UA more attractive to the students we want to attract? The general feeling among C11 members is that the answer to both questions is no. Furthermore, while it is true that some members of the C11 sat on the GENED review committee, all of those members expressed serious concerns at the end of that review that not enough was being done. Senator Neish asked whether graduate students should be included on this proposed task force, since many TA’s are involved in the instruction of GENED classes. Dr. Garcia said nothing precludes GPSC senators from being appointed. Provost Davis commented that he thought the charge to this proposed task force would be broader, to examine the structure of all  undergraduate education. Dr. Garcia assured the Provost that the Committee of Eleven will propose a second task force for that purpose. The enclosed “Reconfiguring Undergraduate Education at the University of Arizona – A White Paper” offers some suggestions. Dr. Hogle questioned whether the acronym UWGEC at the end of the second aim of the task force, which reads “Design appropriate mechanisms to measure and ensure quality and cost effectiveness of the UWGEC” was intended to read,  “Design appropriate mechanisms to measure and ensure quality and cost effectiveness of the UWGEC General Education program.” The mover and seconder acknowledged this typo and accepted the changes as a friendly amendment. Provost Davis asked whether “General Education” is being defined for this task force to include Tier I and II, foundations and basic science courses? Dr. Garcia said the C11 intends for this task force to look expressly at Tier I and II classes.  He offered a friendly amendment to the motion to add an asterisk in the first statement of the motion after the first appearance of the words “General Education” to read “Motion, to establish a senate Task Force on General Education* for the purpose of . . .” with the reference *Tier I and Tier II at the bottom of the page. The mover and seconder accepted this clarification as a friendly amendment. Senator D. Davis commented that the foundations math strand is important for the sciences. Presiding Officer commented that there will be a proposal at a later time for the broader charge of foundations and undergraduate education. Senator Corcoran offered a friendly amendment to add “add GPSC” following “ASUA” to the first line under the heading of “Task Force Composition, to read” “The task force will include representation from all colleges with undergraduate enrollment as well as ASUA and GPSC (12-15 members). The mover and seconder accepted this suggestion as a friendly amendment. Motion passed with two abstentions and one opposed. Presiding Office Mitchell said he will do his best to appoint this task force according to the motion to meet by the end of May, 2007. He circulated a signup sheet for Senators to serve on the Faculty Senate General Education Task Force as well as a signup sheet for persons interested in serving on a yet-to-be proposed review committee on undergraduate education. Provost Davis observed the importance of having Vice Provost for Instruction Hogle to be informed and closely involved in this task force’s effort. His is one of the most challenging and unrewarding jobs and Dr. Hogle has been an amazing advocate for providing resources for GENED.

11.                 ADJOURNMENT

                There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:47 p.m

Jennifer L. Jenkins, Secretary of the Faculty
Pamela S. Bridgmon, Recording Secretary

Appendix*

        1.        OPEN SESSION Statement, 7 May 2007 Douglas Jones, Chair UCCR Topic: TIAA/CREF Social Responsibility Investment Concerns
2.        2007-2008 Faculty Senate and Faculty Senate Executive Committee Meeting Schedules
3.        DRAFT May 7, 2007 ballot for Faculty Senate Election
4.         “May 7, 2007 Faculty Senate Election Candidate’s BioStatements”
5.        Consent Agenda items forwarded from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee
6.        Non-Consent Agenda items forwarded from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee
7.        Academic Personnel Policy Committee Annual Report 2006-07
8.        Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee Annual Report 2006-07
9.        Research Policy Committee Annual Report 2006-07
10.     Student Affairs Policy Committee Annual Report 2006-07
11.     Committee of Eleven Annual Report 2006-07
12.     Committee on Conciliation Annual Report 2006-07
13.     Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure Annual Report 2006-07
14.     University Committee on Corporate Relations 2006-07
15.     University Committee on Ethics and Commitment Annual Report 2006-07
16.     Shared Governance Review Committee Annual Report 2006-07
17.     Senate Representative to the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee Annual Report
18.     Faculty Senate Task Force for Monitoring Labor and Human Rights Issues Annual Report 2006-07
19.     UA FY08 Permanent Reductions (Eligible Base Date 1/11/07)
20.     Committee of Eleven “Resolution on the UA General Education Curriculum,” March 2007
21.     Reconfiguring Undergraduate Education at the University of Arizona: A White Paper” dated March 17, 2007
22.     Report and Recommendations of the University of Arizona General Education Review Committee of 2004-05 date September 16, 2005
23.     UWGEC Plans and Progress 2006-07 Academic Year, dated 19 April 2007
24.     Bar graph: History: General Education Funding Levels from All Funds FY86-097 (in thousands)
25.     PPt slide: History : Most Colleges at the UA College Personnel Budgets
26.     PPt slide: Funding for New Students
27.     PPt slide: Some Transfer of All Funds Temporary Funds to Colleges in FY08
28.     PPt slide: Responsibility Compacts
29.     UA Fall Student Credit Hours (SCH) as COB Day 1 by course Level and Percent that is General Education
30.     Appendix C, UA Tier I, Tier II and Foundation Courses Net Tuition Revenue by College and Term

*Copies of material listed in the Appendix are attached to the original minutes and are on file in the Faculty Center.

Motions of the Meeting of May 7, 2007 

Motion 2007/08-1 Seconded motion from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee to approve the name change of the Department of Media Arts to the School of Media Arts.  Motion carried.

Motion 2007/08-2 Seconded motion from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee to approve implementation of the Master of Fine Arts with a major in Dance as proposed by the School of Dance in the College of Fine Arts. Motion carried.

 Motion 2007/08-3 Seconded motion from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee to approve the name change of the academic program Master of Education with a major in School Counseling and Guidance to the Master of Education with a major in School Counseling. Motion carried.

 Motion 2007/08-4 Seconded motion from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee to approve proposed revision to reduce credit hour restrictions on undergraduates in non-degree status of the curricular policy on Non-degree-Seeking Students by eliminating the first sentence of the policy which reads “Through non-degree status, a student may enroll for a maximum of six credits or two courses per semester.” Motion carried.

Motion 2007/08-5 Seconded motion from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee to approve proposed revision to curricular policy on Non-degree-Seeking Students, to give international students who are native speakers of languages other than English a new option (passing the Test of English as a Foreign Language) for satisfying the foundations-second language requirement. Motion carried.

Motion 2007/08-6 Seconded motion to establish a Senate Task Force on General Education* for the purpose of working in consultation with the University-wide General Education Committee to accomplish the following aims:
        Review existing UWGEC reports, including evaluations of the current course offerings
        Design appropriate mechanisms to measure and ensure quality and cost effectiveness of the UWGEC General Education Program
        Recommend actions to provide greater access to and choice of general education course offerings
        Review current rules and procedures on the substitution of General Education courses, and make recommendations to optimize student learning opportunities
Task Force Composition:
        The task force will include representation from all colleges with undergraduate enrollment as well as ASUA and GPSC (12-15 members)
        One-fourth of the total membership will be from the Faculty Senate
        The task force Chair will be a faculty senator and both the membership and the Chair will be appointed by the Presiding Officer of the Faculty Senate
        At least two task force members will be UWGEC members
Activity Timeline:
        First orientation meeting will be convened by end of May, 2007
        Six, 2-hour meetings (every other week during fall semester)
        Report to Faculty Senate, December, 2007
*Tier I and Tier II
Motion carried with three friendly amendments as noted in bold and strikethrough.

FACULTY CENTER
1400 E. Mabel
PO BOX 210473