Skip to content
  • Print

October 3, 2013

Academic Affairs Committee
Taylor Conference Room
3:00 - 5:00 PM


Present: M. Draheim, J. Haffner, Y. Kim, L. Fox, M. Lee, L. Matz, S. Merry, J. Miles, M. Park, G. Rohlf, J. Uchizono
Guests: C. Darnall

Call to order 3:04 pm

I. Budget Template Primer - Carrie Darnall
Carrie Darnall, Assistant Provost for Resource Management presented "New Program Budget Considerations." She explained that when a new program is proposed, there is a three person resource group that reviews the financials: Carrie, Sondra Roeuny and Jonnalie Parra. The budget review is an iterative process, which follows the new program proposal guidelines. The goal for new programs is that they have a sustainable/positive revenue within five years. The three person group does not provide the numbers, the unit proposing the new program does. This group asks key questions and clarifies the assumptions made by the proposing group. The various scenarios are for changes in enrollment, not changes to costs. The power point presentation is included with the minutes.

II. Academic Affairs at Peer Institutions and our Charge
Preliminary information was gathered from West Coast Conference Institutions for comparison and ideas about Academic Affairs Committee charges. Santa Clara University's Academic Affairs charge is about improving teaching and learning. Our charge isn't about quality assurance or ensuring academic quality. We are more of a curriculum committee, as we approve curriculum and some academic policies. Another question for us is why we have two levels of approval for new programs - Affairs and Academic Council (AC). AC relies on Academic Affairs to scrutinize the proposals. There was an issue last year with the deletion of a program that went straight to Council and didn't come to this committee. Academic Council is a university wide committee and Academic Affairs is a Stockton only committee.

Loyola Marymount has an Academic Planning & Review Committee and a Core Curriculum Committee (general education oversight only). Each school is responsible for the approval of their non-core curriculum. Since our schools/colleges have their own curriculum committees, should this committee continue to review all proposals? Yes, to ensure a larger perspective that encompasses the impact on other units/programs.

The new curriculum software will send a message to other units that are impacted, but the email needs to be detailed in describing its purpose.

Assessment is another key issue. Santa Clara has an assessment committee. Should AA have oversight over assessment? Or should a new committee be established? Eileen McFall would appreciate a statement from Academic Affairs regarding a policy on the expectations of assessment.

Greg meets with the Provost next Friday, and will discuss these issues. Another suggestion is to retain oversight over academic assessment by having the Institutional Effectiveness Committee forward academic reviews to this committee.

III. Consent
Minutes - September 5, 2013
Correction to consent agenda item CIVL 141 (Title Change and course description change)
S. Merry moves to approve with correction, J. Haffner seconds, motion passes with 2 abstentions.

IV. BA/MBA International Commerce - update [L. Matz]
This item was approved by affairs and council last academic year. It is a joint program with the School of Business and the School of International Studies. This program is being reworked because there are issues with financial aid. It will be revised and resubmitted. This should not happen in the future with the new workflow process for new programs as programs do not come to Affairs until these issues are resolved.

V. Course Classifications and Definitions (subcommittee)
An Academic Affairs Subcommittee met last academic year to review and update the course classification definitions that the registrar's office will use. These definitions will be standard for all faculty and will be used with the new Course Information System (CIM). A few specific questions were raised by committee members that affect their units, and these will be answered by Ann Gillen outside of this meeting.

L. Matz moves to approve, subject to clarification to School of Education for their fieldwork, J. Uchizono seconds, motion passes.

VI. What's on your mind?
Deadline to get items in next year's catalog is the February Academic Affairs Committee meeting.

Adjournment at 4:50 pm