March 11, 2004
University of the Pacific – Stockton Campus
Academic Council Meeting
Minutes of March 11, 2004
Business: R. Hoverstad (p), N. Peery (p)
Conservatory: R. Brittin (p), J. Haffner (a), N. Waldvogel (a)
COP: B. Beal (a), D. Borden (p), L. Christianson, (p) C. Dobbs (a), B. Klunk (p), P. Meyer (p), C. Ostberg (p), L. Spreer (p), D. Tedards (p), K. Whittington (a)
Dental: H. Chi pa), J. Levy (a), B. Peltier (p)
Education: M. Draheim (p), V. Snyder (a)
Emeriti: G. Blum (p)
Engineering: M. Doherty (p), CW. Lee (p)
Law: F. Galves (a), W. Jones (a), G. Scully (p)
Library: R. Imhof (p)
Pharmacy: D. Fries (p), S. Smith-Stubblefield (p), D. Abood (p)
SIS: C. Smith (p)
Students: L. Nowinski(p), TBD (a)
Ex-Officio: B. Cox (a), D. Brennan (a), T. Kulisch (a), R. Silvestre (a), C. Hawbaker (a), T. Nelson (a), C. Eaking (a), C. Saviz (a), L. Fox (a), T. Kuhlman (a), Joel Herche (a), R. Koper (a), P. Gilbertson (p), A. Freedman (a).
Guests: Gene Pearson
Chair Larry Spreer called the meeting to order at 3:05 p.m.
1. Executive Session
Chair Larry Spreer asked all non-voting members of Council to leave the room
2. Approval of Minutes
Motion G. Blum moved, M. Draheim second to approve the minutes of February 12, 2004
Motion unanimously approved
3. Chairs Report
Chair Spreer reported on the following:
1. The Admissions and Financial Aid Committee proposed that the University of the Pacific
no longer accept any transfer credits from any institution with a grade C- or below. Around 3 to 3.5 percent of the units that are transferred in are C- or below. When presented to the Academic Affairs Committee, a question was raised about treating other institutions units differently than Pacific’s. Pacific accept our C- and below own grades for student credit towards graduation. The Proposal was sent back to the Admissions and Financial Aid Committee to investigate whether this is appropriate.
2. ASUOP has talked to the Experiential Learning Committee requesting an Experiential Learning Opportunity (ELO) with a lower cost to the student for summer units. The rational is that students would be off campus, thereby lowering costs to the University. From a faculty’s perspective credit will given for the ELO, and a professor will therefore have to supervise and verify the material. Otherwise it is just a summer job for the student. Therefore a question arises as to the appropriate amount of compensation for the professor.
3. International Programs and Services, has been transferred to Student Life but Dr Sina is open to Faculty input wherever appropriate, Discussions are ongoing about reorganizing the Study Abroad Committee; a name change and converting it to it a policy generating committee for International Program and Services, are being considered.
4. Parking may become an issue in the coming year, since Pacific neighbors have a petition to the City of Stockton to install 2hr limit parking signs around the neighboring streets. This will increase the number of people seeking parking on campus.
5. The Academic Council meeting for April 22nd will be held at McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento, and the meeting will start at 4:00 pm. Those interested in carpooling please contact Chair Spreer to make arrangements.
4. Provost Report
1. Provost Gilbertson reported that Stockton campus enrollment for Spring 2004 had a 4% attrition rate, which was lower than the budgeted 5%. Fall applications for all campuses are on track. The Stockton campus has already received over 5200 applications. However there is significant concern about the impact of the proposed lower amount for CAL-Grant, the State’s scholarship for students from lower income families. For most of the private schools in California this is not a big issue since the number of students receiving this grant is relatively small. For Pacific over 250 students of the freshman class, typically qualify for the grant. If the Legislature and the Governor come to an agreement about a large reduction in the grant, Pacific could loose a significant number of students that do not have the resources to make up the difference. In the student’s acceptance letter Pacific is assuring the student of a $10,000 grant from the University. The Cabinet has reached an agreement to aim for 800 freshman students, budgeted at 775 and planning for a maximum at no more than 825 students. Discussion followed.
2. Provost Gilbertson made an observation regarding the Information Technology Planning Committee, he said this committee has never functioned very well and does not seem to be improving which is frustrating to everyone, staff and faculty. There is intensive planning going on to rectify the problems.
3. There has been discussions as the University moves forward in the program review for the General Education Program for undergraduate students. One of the key recommendations from the writing task force committee is to make the Director of General Education a full time appointment; currently this position is a 60% time appointment, President DeRosa and Provost Gilbertson are supportive of the recommendation. General Education is a complex and challenging program that merits the increase, since the full time equivalent faculty involved, and the number of units generated just in the Mentor Program is larger than 2 of the academic units. The question is how to define this position: some have argued that it should be at a Dean’s level and sit in the Council of Deans; the College’s Dean suggested that since much of the General Education (95% of the units taught) are in the College, it would be more effective to have the Director of General Education be an Associate Dean of the College; and others have said that it should be an Assistant Provost position since it is a campus wide effort. No decision has been made.
5. Update on General Education Program Review – Gene Pearson, Chair of General Education Program Review Panel
Professor Pearson gave a chronological report to date of the review panel, as well as some history of the General Education Program. Information and status on General Education review can be viewed at www.pacific.edu/ge . He encouraged wide participation in the open meetings on General Education that will be held in April. Discussion followed.
6. Promotions and Tenure Committee
Chair Spreer talked about agreement between Faculty and Administration on the section on procedural changes for the Promotions and Tenure Committee. Section 7 of the Faculty Handbook is now ready to be presented to the Board of Regents for approval. There is some disagreement between Administration and Faculty on 6.3.5 section of the Faculty Handbook, which deals with the membership of the Committee. Three of the major changes have been agreed upon by both parties.
Increase in faculty participation from 3 to 7 Tenured Faculty members (three from the College of the Pacific, one from each division, four from the other Schools, Colleges and Library)
One student appointed annually by the ASUOP President,
Change in the role of the Provost, (or the Associate Provost, or the Assistant Provost) from chair of the committee to an ex-officio non-voting member.
The faculty approved these changes 192 to 6 on an electronic vote.
President DeRosa and Provost Gilbertson both value the perspective brought by the Deans; they both have experience at institutions where no Deans participate on PTC and they both like our current structure. A meeting was held between President DeRosa, Provost Gilbertson and 8 faculty members to discuss their views on decanal participation in the Promotions and Tenure Committee. President DeRosa made a proposal that expands the faculty membership, keep the one student representative, changes the role of the Provost but keeps two Deans as voting members. Chair Spreer endorses the President’s proposal and suggested this new proposal be sent for vote to the faculty. Discussion followed
D. Fries moved, L. Christianson second motion to accept the new proposal of changes to section 6.3.5 of the Faculty Handbook and submit it for faculty vote. Incorporating friendly amendments to include Library and grammatical correction. Motion approved with one abstention.
7. Uniform Core Questions for Student Evaluation of Courses
The Council of Deans is aware that there is a wide discrepancy about student course evaluations. Some units use very detailed and some very general forms. The Council of Deans suggested that there be a uniform core set of questions that all courses at Pacific use for student course evaluation. The questionaire could be made unit or department specific by adding other items. The Professional Relations and Academic Affairs Committees do not feel the creation of this form falls under their responsibilities. Chair Spreer’s view is that Faculty with Student input should be the ones generating the questions or evaluation tools. D. Fries moved R. Hoverstad second to create an ad-hoc committee of 5 faculty members and 2 students to evaluate course evaluations and provide a list of core questions applicable to any program. Motion unanimously approved.
Motion: G. Scully moved, L. Nowinski seconded to adjourn. Motion unanimously approved. Meeting adjourned at 5:11 p.m.
Ana T. Orellana
Academic Council Secretary