ࡱ>  bjbjVV 7<<&8tl^gR"fffffff$iRlg###gg***#2f*#f**=>@e#,&=f.g0^g=l'l,>>l>'dR *P!"gg)^g####l : WESTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY Regular Meeting, 30 November 2010, 4:00 p.m. Capitol Rooms - University Union A C T I O N M I N U T E S SENATORS PRESENT: B. Clark, L. Conover, B. Davies, D. DeVolder, K. Durkin, S. Haynes, R. Hironimus-Wendt, D. Hunter, N. Made Gowda, J. McNabb, L. Miczo, K. Pawelko, C. Pynes, S. Rahman, P. Rippey, I. Szabo, B. Thompson, T. Werner, D. Yoder Ex-officio: Jack Thomas, Provost; Tej Kaul, Parliamentarian SENATORS ABSENT: G. Delany-Barmann, M. Hoge, M. Singh GUESTS: Lori Baker-Sperry, Ray Diez, Nick DiGrino, Autumn Greenwood, Bill Knight, Jim LaPrad, Rose McConnell, Russ Morgan, Bill Polley, Bill Pratt, Jim Rabchuk, Aimee Shouse I. Consideration of Minutes A. 9 November 2010 MINUTES APPROVED AS DISTRIBUTED II. Announcements A. Approvals from the President and the Provost 1. Approvals from the President a. Removal of 24 s.h. restriction for admission to the Interdisciplinary Studies degree program Chairperson DeVolder announced that President Goldfarb did not approve Faculty Senates recommendation to add UPI representatives to the search committees for the Vice President for Administrative Services and the Vice President for Student Services. President Goldfarbs response to Faculty Senate explains that The rationale for not approving the attached resolution is that the request for the revision to the current makeup of vice-presidential search committees did not follow the appropriate procedures found within the current policy. Any request for such a change should be made following the process indicated in the policy. The request for the policy change presented to the Senate was, I believe, made due to a misunderstanding of an email correspondence. 2. Approvals from the Provost a. Requests for New Courses i. BC 285, Broadcasting Practicum, 1 s.h. (repeatable to 4 s.h.) ii. ECON 315, Economics of Sport, 3 s.h. iii. PSY 200, Careers in Psychology, 1 s.h. iv. REL 458, Comparative Asian Religious Thought, 3 s.h. b. Request for New Minor i. Graphic Design c. Requests for New Options i. Bachelor of Arts: Graphic Design ii. Bachelor of Fine Arts: Graphic Design d. Request for Change in Option i. Applied Music: Jazz Studies e. Request for Inclusion in General Education i. MUS 397, Jazz History Survey, 3 s.h. f. Request for General Education Global Issues Designation i. GEOG 100, Human Geography, 3 s.h. B. Provost's Report Provost Thomas told senators that there has been no change in 鶹s budget process in light of the fact that the state of Illinois still owes the University over $32 million. Provost Thomas is pleased that an arrest was made in response to recent bomb threats. He told senators that when threats of any kind occur, the University tries to respond within 15 minutes or less because technology-savvy students often communicate with their parents very quickly and the University starts receiving calls. Provost Thomas said that many other institutions are also facing the same kinds of challenges regarding responses to various threats. He thanked faculty for working with students because in some cases residence halls had to be evacuated in the middle of the night, while noting that some students who dont live in the residence halls have tried to use the threats as an excuse for missing classes. Concerns have been expressed about 鶹s day care when threats are received, and Provost Thomas, after meeting with the 鶹 Organization for Women, has established a committee to be chaired by Associate Provost Dallinger to plan for these events; their first meeting will be held next week. Provost Thomas announced that all 鶹 faculty completed ethics training by the deadline. A few student workers did not complete the training, and the University will follow established guidelines in these cases. The families of three students will receive their posthumous degrees at the December 18 commencement ceremony. Last May, Fresno State President John Welty was awarded the honorary doctorate but could not attend the ceremony due to weather conditions; he has agreed to come this December to receive his award. The search for a Dean for the College of Education and Human Services, chaired by Dean Martinelli-Fernandez, is progressing nicely. Provost Thomas will be chairing the search for a Vice President for Student Services. The Provost expressed his appreciation for faculty input and participation on the search committees. Provost Thomas reported that distance learning online classes have increased by 23 for spring semester: 85 were offered in fall 2010, and 108 are scheduled to be offered in spring. Online enrollment for spring 2011 is projected at 2,100 at this time. Provost Thomas reported that Rick Carter, Director of the School of Distance Learning, International Studies, and Outreach, is endeavoring to do more recruiting of undergraduate international students in light of the fact that 鶹 has many more graduate international students than undergrads. Senator Thompson asked how much money 鶹 currently has on hand and if the University will be able to meet its payroll. Provost Thomas responded the University has over nine million dollars and will be able to make payroll. He said this question comes up often, but 鶹 does a good job of making sure that payroll needs are met, and there are mechanisms in place to make sure that 鶹 can draw funds from different places if budget challenges require the University to do so in order to meet payroll. Senator Thompson asked what percentage of on-campus students are taking distance classes. Provost Thomas responded there are quite a few but not a majority. He said most students take classes from afar because of the General Studies degree program. Senator Thompson asked Provost Thomas if it would concern him to see more local students take online classes. Provost Thomas responded he was initially concerned about this, but now believes if local students want to take online classes, they should be allowed to do so as long as sufficient seats are available for General Studies students. C. Student Government Association (SGA) Report (Autumn Greenwood, SGA representative to Faculty Senate) The SGA is participating in a street cleanup effort on the Macomb square. Interhall Council is exploring the possibility of obtaining busses for the football game this weekend and charging students to ride. If their efforts are successful, faculty would be able to ride to the game as well. SGA passed a bill last week regarding repair of two blue emergency lights on campus. D. Other Announcements As requested by the Executive Committee, the Senate Council for Instructional Technology has designated one of their members George Mangalaraj from the School of Computer Sciences as the faculty representative on the new Task Force on University Technology labs. Chairperson DeVolder expressed the Senates thanks to outgoing Senators Durkin and Davies, who served during the fall semester sabbaticals of Senators Erdmann and Anderson. The Faculty Senate recognizes the passing of the following 鶹 students: Lyndsey Manual, English major; Kerstin Taylor, Special Education major; and Devin VanBrooker, Law Enforcement and Justice Administration major. Faculty Senate expresses its sympathy to the families of these students. III. Reports of Committees and Councils A. Council on Admission, Graduation and Academic Standards (Bill Polley, Chair) 1. CAGAS Recommendations in Response to Noel-Levitz Report CAGAS has recommended approving the administrative changes to the OAS program proposed by Noel-Levitz. This would involve an expansion of the auto OASportion of the admissions grid so that certain combinations of ACT scores and GPAs that are currently reviewed by both OAS and admissions would be auto admitted into the OAS program. CAGAS does not, however, support a change in the current practice of admitting students into the OAS program on Academic Warning. According to the CAGAS report, Noel-Levitz had recommended discontinuing this practice. CAGAS felt that it is important to send a strong signal to students of the need to maintain a 2.0 GPA during their first semester and limit their extra-curricular activities. CAGAS disagrees with Noel-Levitz that this makes students feel like second-class citizens. Rather, CAGAS believes that it provides students with a strong incentive to perform well. Senator Rippey asked if any evidence is available that students are choosing not to come to 鶹 because of this perception. Dr. Polley responded that the data from Institutional Research and Planning shows that the number of students with higher ACTs but in the lower GPA range that are accepted to 鶹 and actually attend is fairly small. He added that there is no direct anecdotal evidence that students who would be admitted under OAS Academic Warning are not choosing to come to 鶹. She asked where Noel-Levitz obtained the impression that students feel like second-class citizens; Dr. Polley responded that he does not know where they got that information. Provost Thomas asked if they could be receiving feedback from Discover 鶹 surveys. He noted that if they are receiving the feedback from current students, they are not choosing to go elsewhere because of a second-class citizen perception. Senator Rippey remarked it might be worthwhile to determine where Noel-Levitz has gotten the perception that OAS Academic Warning students see themselves as second-class citizens and provide that data to CAGAS. Dr. Polley told Senate that Noel-Levitz made this statement to CAGAS time and again but CAGAS objected to their recommendation to eliminate Academic Warning because the Council believes it provides students with a good incentive to do well their first semesters. Parliamentarian Kaul asked if Noel-Levitz could be basing their statement on interviews with current 鶹 students; Senator Rippey pointed out that if this is the case, these students are still choosing to come to 鶹. Provost Thomas noted that part of the discussion Noel-Levitz had with administrators included the language used in the letters to students and that students who are admitted without Academic Warning to other institutions may be more likely to attend elsewhere. Parliamentarian Kaul reiterated it is important to know which group Noel-Levitz interviewed to develop their conclusions. Senator Pynes asked if Academic Warning is the same as Academic Probation and how stringent it is; for instance, what happens if students on Academic Warning do not achieve a 2.0 their first semester at 鶹. Dr. Polley responded students on Academic Warning are normally not ejected in this case but may be placed on Academic Probation. Senator Pynes does not understand why all students admitted to 鶹 do not have the same rights and responsibilities as regular admits. He believes that if students are at-risk, they should have the same chance to improve and not be on their second chance when first admitted. He is unsure that putting students on Academic Warning when they first enroll is to 鶹s advantage if there are no teeth to the designation because it could act as a disincentive. Registrar Angela Lynn explained that if a student on Academic Warning who has not met the GPA requirement completes his/her first semester with a 1.0 GPA or higher, the student is then placed on Academic Probation; if less than 1.0, the student is suspended. Students also have to meet with an OAS advisor. Dr. Lynn confirmed that there is one less warning period for a student admitted under the OAS program. Senator Pynes asserted that at-risk students may need an extra chance, not fewer chances. He stated that if the Academic Warning OAS program is important and has demonstrated real success, it should be called something more positive and the benefits of coming to 鶹 should be stressed rather than telling students they will start their college careers with a slap on the wrist. He suggested the program be called Academic Support rather than Academic Warning so that there is some indication that students will get some benefit from participating in it. Provost Thomas remarked this is the opinion of Noel-Levitz as well. Dr. Polley told senators he has spoken with Admissions and OAS, and the language in the letters to students has been changed; the program is now being referred to as Academic Notice and the policy is more clearly explained in the new letters to affected students. Senator Pynes stated it may be in 鶹s best interest to eliminate Academic Warning entirely and have students be considered special admits who will receive additional help from the beginning rather than have these students receive one less warning than those regularly admitted. Senator Hironimus-Wendt expressed his agreement with Senator Pynes, adding that as a sociologist he sees the disadvantages in labeling students at-risk before they ever arrive at 鶹; it is a negative label and sends a negative message. He agreed that if empirical evidence is desired, matriculation rates of the at-risk or Academic Warning students that choose not to come to 鶹 should be examined; if the regular admissions rate is higher than the matriculation rate, the conclusion can be drawn that something about the Academic Warning program is discouraging this group from coming to 鶹. He noted that it seems as if data is currently only available from students that choose to come to 鶹, but data needs to be compared from students that choose not to come to 鶹. Senator Rippey expressed her agreement, adding she would like to know the success rate of those students that dont come to 鶹 and attend at another institution without the Academic Warning program do those students successfully complete their first year elsewhere? She said while she does not object to academic support systems for students, she suspects Noel-Levitz is looking at national practices that universities use which actually discourage enrollment without being grounded in admitting students for success. She suggested if students attend Illinois State or the University of Illinois without being placed on any type of Academic Warning upon admission and make it through their first year, maybe it doesnt make sense for 鶹 to put them in a special category, particularly with students withrelatively high ACTs but who lack strong GPAs. She said more empirical evidence is needed than intuition and best practices. Dr. Polley stated the matriculation rate for students in the OAS program varies based on GPA and ACT. He said 鶹 is enrolling a larger percentage of students in the middle range around a 20 ACT and 2.5 GPA and their performance based upon their first semesters GPAs are slightly higher than those students not receiving OAS services but with comparable GPAs. He related as CAGAS looked at this data, it seemed that OAS was doing a good job: students brought into the program are performing well during their first semesters. Dr. Polley told senators that the matriculation was different for the small handful of students with higher ACTS and low GPAs. CAGAS took these results as indicating these students are capable of performing well on their ACT tests but have to learn to better apply themselves, which they may or may not do in college. He noted that one of the Noel-Levitz recommendations that CAGAS accepted is that students who have a 2.0 or higher GPA and a 23 or better ACT a bit above the norm for ACT but with a lower GPA will now become regular admits and will not receive the Academic Warning letter or OAS services. He said CAGAS is more concerned with students at the lower end of the ACT spectrum, and data shows that these students perform as well or better with OAS services than regularly admitted students. He added that at this level there are several hundred students. Parliamentarian Kaul pointed out that the current discussion involves technical terms in various combinations, but what CAGAS has disagreed with is a perception that Academic Warning students feel like second-class citizens, and it is difficult to measure, or to dislodge, a perception. He believes this is more important than whether OAS is doing a good job addressing the needs of at-risk students. Dr. Lynn reiterated that CAGAS was asked to look at what steps the University can take immediately in terms of changing the admissions process for fall 2011, so changes in policy and redefining admissions standards could not be considered when students are already being admitted for next year. She said those larger policy issues and issues of Academic Warning can be on the table when CAGAS considers changes for 2012 and beyond, but the current recommendations really deal with 2011 and what needs to happen immediately, such as minor changes in the process and policies. She said Institutional Research and Planning has research regarding students attending other institutions that would have been defined at 鶹 as OAS students, but although the data is there, the question that still remains is why. Senator Rippey asked if Faculty Senate can have access to that data. Dr. Polley said he has not received a copy of it, but he hopes to do so when CAGAS begins to consider 2012 admissions requirements. He said CAGAS has already seen reams of raw data and calculations for many institutions, but there was no time to do the kind of assessment that would be necessary and still make determinations for 2011 admits. Senator Pynes noted that it takes students, particularly first generation college students, awhile to find out how the university works. He said he still doesnt know why any student should not be admitted with all of the rights as any other student. He thinks Academic Warning admits should be eliminated, and at-risk students should be allowed the same rights as all others. He asked how many students are admitted under Academic Warning; Dr. Polley responded that OAS targets 400 new freshmen. Senator Pynes said while he is not opposed to extra support for students, he does oppose students being admitted on Academic Warning and believes Faculty Senate should take up this issue and change it. He believes all students should have the same rights and responsibilities because part of being in college is learning about being in college, and this could take three weeks or more. Senator Pynes stated if students already feel behind when they begin at the institution, it might make being successful more difficult; it may be better to strongly encourage students to get special advising without labeling them with Academic Warning. Dr. Rabchuk recalled that former Admissions Director David Garcia instituted the Academic Warning policy. He said when Mr. Garcia presented the argument, he spoke about trends in admissions showing that university performance tracks better with GPAs than it does with ACTs. Senator Rippey stated that GPAs are particular to the institution; there is a world of difference between a 2.0 from Harvard and the same GPA from DeVry. She pointed out that ACT tests are given to students across the country; thus, they have some validity that GPAs dont have. Senator Durkin remarked that OAS does a great job, and recalled it may have been former Admissions Director Karen Helmers rather than Garcia that instituted the current policy. He asked if special academic admissions are eliminated, why the University should not consider open enrollment and do away with all GPA and ACT considerations. He also asked if one student made the comment that he/she felt like a second-class citizen or if 100 students made the comment. Senator Durkin noted that students in the OAS program are provided with special services to enhance their successes, and wonders if they cant achieve a 1.0 GPA with the assistance of these special services, what chance these students will have for success without them. He does not see a problem with the OAS program, which has been very successful. Senator Rahman stated the OAS program for at-risk students seems to make sense because success at the University is not necessarily tied to how well students do on ACT tests whereas GPAs have to do with showing up for class and doing the work. Senator Durkin asked if OAS still interviews the students admitted into its program. Registrar Lynn said they no longer do that; they now look solely at high school transcripts and ACT scores. Senator Pynes remarked that just because students under a special admit program should have the same rights as other students does not mean that 鶹 should have open enrollment. He said if these students have to be told they have only one chance at 鶹 whereas students admitted regularly have more, then they should not be enrolled at all under those conditions. He believes pressure should not be put on students to fail; all students should be given a full chance. Senator McNabb observed that parallel discussions were occurring the issue of students being set up to fail, which is part of the larger issue of some students perceptions that they are admitted as second-class citizens. She pointed out that #8 on page 6 of the Noel-Levitz report (Recommended Procedures for Reviewing Freshman Applicants for 2011) states that Students accepted with the OAS contingency should enter the University with the same rights and responsibilities as any other student. Because they are at risk academically, they should not be punished before they enroll by losing a warning/probation period. Senator McNabb believes this is all that is meant by feeling like a second-class citizen whether a student loses a probation period. She said that rather than becoming mired in students feelings like there is some sort of stigma attached to Academic Warning, senators should concentrate on the fact that Academic Warning designates removal of one probationary period so students dont get a full year to prove themselves. Dr. Polley told senators that the former assessment and interview process conducted by OAS has been discontinued at the recommendation of Noel-Levitz because it was felt to be taking too much time. He said CAGAS is now considering for 2012 whether recommendation letters should be required in place of the former system. He stated that a CAGAS subcommittee hears admissions cases mainly for students who receive ACTs of 14 or 15 with sufficiently high GPAs that OAS and Admissions agrees that the students have a chance to succeed at 鶹. He said the subcommittee has approved every one of the requests that OAS and Admissions have agreed upon and brought forward. Dr. Polley reiterated that everything is on the table for 2012; the recommendations in the CAGAS report before Senate are only for fall 2011 admissions. Senator Hunter expressed his agreement with Senator Pyness statement about changing the verbiage to a more positive statement than Academic Warning conveys. He said students also need to understand, however, that they are being admitted as an exception to the standard admissions requirements and a significant number of them will have to take 099-level courses that will not add to their degrees in order to bring them up to a proficiency level. He said these students are somewhat starting their college careers behind the 8-ball; while it can be couched in positive terms and the University does want them to succeed, it is important to be honest with these students because they should not be set up to fail based upon an exaggeration of their remediations. Senator Werner also expressed her agreement with Senator Pynes. She said it seems like the Academic Warning changes are more of a revision of procedure than policy, and at the very least the language needs to be modified and the number of chances available to these students needs to be equalized. She stated that the GPAs of transfer students from community colleges are not necessarily high depending upon the courses taken and the rigor of the program; some students with high GPAs still do poorly once admitted to 鶹 because of the adjustment period. Senator Hironimus-Wendt observed that the differences in treatment for students admitted as Academic Warning is simply a way of talking about discrimination; the University is looking at a class of people and saying that this group is going to be treated differently. He believes while intentional discrimination against a category of students is not always wrong, the University needs to conduct it in a positive rather than a negative sense, perhaps by noting that the University realizes the students do not meet the stated criteria but 鶹 is going to work with them to improve their futures. He believes it is negative to label some students as different and put extra pressure on them to perform at a level that is not the same as that for regular admits; these students are exceptions in that they dont meet the criteria, but it can be handled in a positive context, such as offering additional opportunities for those who need them. Senator Hironimus-Wendt stated that labeling students at-risk can sometimes become a self-fulfilling prophesy. He told senators studies at Harvard since 1970 show that if educators treat students as being less capable, they tend to meet those expectations. He said 鶹 needs to be more positive with these students rather than accept their money one semester and not be surprised when they dont come back a subsequent semester. Senator Rippey stated that, whether for next year or 2012, the Noel-Levitz presentation leads her to believe there is empirical evidence on a national scale that there are categories of students who will not necessarily apply because they cannot be regular admits. Senator Rippey would like for the data to be examined for 鶹 and on a national scale to determine if there is evidence that students have a good chance of succeeding in college with, for instance, less than a 2.0 and a 23 ACT and if those students should be admitted on the same terms as regular admits. She said policies need to be backed by empirical evidence, and she would like to see that data. Dr. Polley stated that CAGAS can obtain the hard data on where students have decided to matriculate and the retention rates for those who applied at 鶹 but did not meet the regular criteria, as well as looking at the performance of those students who choose to come to 鶹 under special admissions standards and their retention rates. He said the retention rate data he has seen so far for students admitted under Academic Warning is comparable to those regular admit students whose GPAs/ACTs are just above the minimum standards. Dr. Polley responded to Senator Werners earlier statements by clarifying that the admissions standards being considered are just for freshman admits and have nothing to do with transfer admissions. He reiterated that for fall 2012, CAGAS will look at all of the data, but at this time the recommendations are only for fall 2011 and do not include any policy changes. Chairperson DeVolder agreed that some of the comments that have been made are ones that go far beyond fall 2011, some of which involve policy changes that will likely require extensive research. He clarified that senators today have to decide if they wish to go forward with CAGASs recommendations specifically for fall 2011 freshman enrollment. He added that admissions decisions beyond fall 2011 are still on the table and there will be considerable discussions at CAGAS and opportunities for Faculty Senate to weigh in on those in the future. NO OBJECTIONS TO THE CAGAS REPORT Dr. Polley thanked senators for their feedback and promised it will be used by CAGAS as they go forward with discussions in the spring. B. Council on Curricular Programs and Instruction (Jim LaPrad, Chair) 1. Requests for New Courses a. CHEM 492, Safety Practices in Chemistry Research, 1 s.h. Senator McNabb asked why the department chose to make this a senior level class and if any thought was given to offering it earlier in the curriculum. Chemistry Chair Rose McConnell explained that CHEM 492 is focused on research and the department wishes to offer it to their graduate students as well as to undergraduates. Senator Made Gowda pointed out two minor corrections in the course request that will be revised before it goes forward to the Provost. CHEM 492 APPROVED WITH CORRECTIONS b. ENGR 481, Finite Element Analysis, 3 s.h. ENGR 481 APPROVED c. GCOM 111, Graphic Communication Foundations, 3 s.h. Senator Rippey asked what GCOM 111 is intended to do, whether it is intended as an introduction to theoretical disciplinary concepts or an introduction to different additional courses. Engineering Technology Chair Ray Diez responded the course is intended to introduce students to different concepts as well as preparing them for future courses. The Student Needs to be Served section states that The GCOM 111 course is designed to introduce beginning students to concepts in the Graphic Communication industry This course will allow students the opportunity to become more familiar with courses in this discipline without having to wait until their sophomore year. Senator Rippey pointed out that this section of the course request sounds as if in part of the course students will learn about things in other courses, making it seem like a foundations class. Dr. Diez explained that part of the confusion may be remedied with a correction to the last sentence of the Student Needs to be Served section: become familiar with courses concepts in this discipline GCOM 111 APPROVED WITH CHANGE d. GCOM 218, Interactive Media Production, 3 s.h. e. GCOM 413, Packaging and Display Technologies, 3 s.h. f. JOUR 100, News/Media Literacy, 3 s.h. REMAINING NEW COURSES APPROVED 2. Request for Change in Major a. Forensic Chemistry FORENSIC CHEMISTRY CHANGE APPROVED C. Writing Instruction in the Disciplines Committee 1. Request for Change in WID Requirements a. Forensic Chemistry WID Committee Chair Jim Rabchuk explained that the change in major for Forensic Chemistry would include a change in the WID requirement to two courses already approved for WID, and students could then take either one to fulfill the requirement. Senator McNabb asked if the two courses were intended to be taken as a sequence or are stand-alone. Dr. Rabchuk responded they are stand-alone courses. CHANGE IN WID REQUIREMENTS APPROVED 2. Request for BGS Online Writing Designation a. WS 355, Introduction to Feminist Theory, 3 s.h. Senator Rahman inquired about the essay requirements for the course; Dr. Rabchuk pointed out that two four-page essays are required in addition to responses to readings. Senator McNabb asked if the course is already approved for WID designation and is now just requesting Bachelor of General Studies Writing designation; Dr. Rabchuk responded that WS 355 is not currently a WID course. Parliamentarian Kaul asked if WS 355 will be offered on campus as well; Dr. Rabchuk responded that it will be offered on campus as well as online. BGS WRITING DESIGNATION APPROVED D. Committee on Provost and Presidential Performance (Lynda Conover, Chair) 1. Survey Instrument Senator Conover told senators that no changes were made to the survey instrument from last year with the exception of a request to add two questions at the end of the evaluation: Do you believe the stated goals as listed by the president (and accessed at the beginning of this survey) are adequate goals? and Are there any other goals that you believe should also be included? She stated the Committee began looking at including the goals of the President and Provost after discussions with the two administrators indicated they had concerns that these documents were not part of the evaluations. She said, on the other hand, the Committee is charged to determine the opinions of faculty on the performance of the President and Provost, and to provide faculty with an opportunity for feedback, so the addition of the two questions and the President/Provosts goals is seen as a compromise. The survey this year would provide links to the Board of Trustees goals for the President and the goals set by the President for the Provost, as well as to the Presidents and Provosts self-evaluations. Senator Hunter asked if the link to the documents will be on the same page as the questions relating to them; Senator Conover stated the link will only appear at the beginning of the survey. Senator Hunter asked if there will be any indication at the beginning of the survey that follow-up questions to these documents will follow. Senator Conover responded there will be a statement encouraging faculty to access the links. She said although it was suggested that the link to the goals and self-evaluations be included on each page, the Committee felt that to do so would change the focus of the survey. She said the Committee wishes to obtain opinions of faculty with the goals in mind, if they are recommended for inclusion by Senate, but the primary goal is to obtain faculty perceptions. Senator Hunter stated that if faculty do not have an indication at the beginning of the survey that they may have to answer questions about the goals and self-evaluations, they may not review them, then get to the end and find that they have to go back to the beginning of the survey to access the link. Senator Pynes related that a link to the Presidents and Provosts goals was included at the beginning of last years survey because the administrators had concerns that the evaluation was unfair, but he is not sure how many faculty accessed the link. He said that last year the President was given the opportunity to write up a position statement for the beginning of the survey but chose not to do so. Senator Pynes stated faculty want to basically evaluate the president upon his job performance, but, like students evaluating professors, faculty dont know the Presidents and Provosts actual responsibilities. He agreed that having the link on every page would change the nature of the survey. Senator Hunter suggested the link should at least occur on the last page of the survey. Senator Pynes suggested the emails sent to faculty before taking the survey could suggest they read these documents; faculty could then read the self-evaluations and goals at their leisure and take the survey at a later time. Senator Rippey pointed out that the goals for the President are set by the BOT and the goals for the Provost are set by the President, and they may not track with the faculty. She stated the Senates survey is from the perspective of faculty, and the Committee felt that privileging these goals is not in the faculty perspective. She added faculty do have a sense of what the Provost and President should do; to put the goals more prominently within the survey is to ask the faculty to do what is even less possible to say what the President should do to satisfy the BOT, and faculty cant know this. She said while she does not object to including the link to help faculty, the survey is about facultys evaluations of the President and Provost, and she does not support the two additional questions being proposed, adding that it is unlikely the BOT will be influenced much by what the faculty think about the Presidents goals. Senator Hironimus-Wendt said he does not disagree with any of the statements made thus far but offers his understanding of the process. He believes a lot of junior colleagues dont understand the history of the survey. Senator Hironimus-Wendt served on the Committee on Provost and Presidential Performance during his previous term, and it was his understanding that the original questions were developed from the faculty interest but made to mirror the Presidents and Provosts job descriptions. He related that two years ago an attempt was made to tailor these questions a little better to the interests of faculty and to remove ambiguity, such as one question asking about two ideas joined by a conjunction. He said the current survey is the Senates perception of what the faculty is interested in assessing. Senator Thompson pointed out that the Provosts and Presidents goals are set each academic year, and when they are evaluated by the Senates survey they have not had an entire year to fulfill those goals. He said this is another reason not to place too much emphasis on these goals by including them on every page. Senator Pynes stated that when he reworked the surveys two years ago, the Provost and President shared their concerns that faculty do not know how to effectively evaluate them because they dont really know what they do; however, both the President and Provost had the opportunity to remove questions from the surveys or to add questions at that time and both declined to do so. Senator Pynes believes the final two questions that Senate is considering adding will result in a lot of no opinion responses. Parliamentarian Kaul announced he was the person at the Executive Committee meeting who originally suggested the link to the Presidents/Provosts goals be included on each page of the survey, and now realizes that this particular suggestion was not a good one. He pointed out, however, that in the online ethics survey it is impossible to go backwards, and asked if this would be the case with the Senates survey and if faculty should be made to go to the link before continuing on to the rest of the survey. Senator Hunter remarked that if this was the case, he would exit the survey immediately. Senator Rippey stated the Committee believes the survey will be most meaningful if it can establish some traditions, if the same questions can be included on subsequent surveys. She said the Committee tried to include some gesture to acknowledge the concerns of the President and Provost by including the link to the goals, but she believes it should be a small, polite gesture and the scientific validity of the survey should be maintained. Senator Hunter stated he does not believe the link to the goals should appear on each page but should be included on the page that asks the specific questions pertaining to the goals; he stated if he had to return to the beginning of the survey to access the link to those goals, he would probably just skip those questions. Senator Rippey suggested alternatively those questions could just be removed. Senator Thompson suggested that with the hiring of a new President, this might be the opportunity for Faculty Senate to rethink these evaluations more closely. He suggested Senate consider sending the evaluations in the fall after the President and Provost have completed a year of goals rather than in the spring. He said another idea would be to have the Presidents and Provosts self-evaluations distributed earlier and separate from the surveys. Senator Thompson believes Faculty Senate should ask what it wants to come out of the evaluations and if there is room for improvement. Senator Pynes pointed out that the policies and procedures document for the Committee on Provost and Presidential Performance was just written last year, but if the Committee wishes to review it, it can be brought back to Senate with revisions. Senator Pynes asked if changes are made to the survey documents today, if they would need to come back to Senate for a second vote; he noted that the time factor involved may preclude this. Parliamentarian Kaul responded this would not be necessary. Chairperson DeVolder explained that if senators do not wish to add the two questions proposed by the Committee, a senator will need to object to the report. In response to a question, Senator Conover clarified that a majority of the Committee approved adding the two questions about goals, but it was not unanimous. SENATOR PYNES OBJECTED TO THE REPORT Senator Pynes clarified he objected to the report because he does not think the two additional goals questions are appropriate for this survey instrument. Motion: To restore consideration of the CPPP report to the agenda (Rippey/Pynes) MOTION APPROVED 16 YES 0 NO 0 AB Motion: To approve the surveys without the new questions (Pynes/Thompson) Senator Conover asked for clarification as to whether the motion refers only to removal of the last two questions or whether the link to the goals is to be removed as well. Senator Pynes responded his intention was only to remove the last two questions but to leave the link to the goals and self-evaluations. MOTION APPROVED 15 YES 1 NO 0 AB IV. Old Business None V. New Business None Motion: To adjourn (Rippey) The Faculty Senate adjourned at 5:40 p.m. Lynda Conover, Senate Secretary Annette Hamm, Faculty Senate Recording Secretary     PAGE  PAGE 12 *+,-89<=?CkǼ|peZRZJRBhOBICJaJh3CJaJhYyCJaJhK;3hhmCJaJhK;3h(CJaJhK;3hhm5CJaJhaahhm5>*CJaJhaahhmCJaJhhmCJaJhkP5CJaJhkP56CJaJh56CJaJhMe56CJaJhGj56CJaJhaahhm6CJaJhvvCJaJh 1{CJaJh<5hhmCJaJ haahhmIjkx  |^`|gdc  |^`|gdhK |^`|gdHN4gd=@&gdhm$a$gdhmgdhm $@&a$gdhm $@&a$gd 1{@&gdhm  ! - . 7 B M U W m n o w    0 > J Z t ǿҷڤ}}umuuuuh*'CJaJhACJaJhK;3hhm5CJaJh0nCJaJh(CJaJhc hGjCJaJhc CJaJhK;3hOBICJaJh}}CJaJhqCJaJhK;3hqCJaJhYyCJaJhOBICJaJhK;3hhmCJaJhGjCJaJhK;3hGjCJaJ'   4 < Y _ `  LQxɽ᠕}ti]hUIohUIo>*䴳󱫱䴳>*䴳䴳<CJaJ hUIo>*hUIohUIoCJaJhUIoCJaJhAhA>*CJaJhc 5CJaJhhKhhK5CJaJhOBICJaJhhKCJaJhc CJaJhACJaJhHN4hHN4>*CJaJhHN4hHN4CJaJ$   5 6 Z [ v @ |^@ `|gd< gdUIo< \`0X8p@ P !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I@ ^@ `gdUIo 0^`0gd#d |^`|gdHN4 |^`|gdhK Kx9:b  gdUIo< \`0X8p@ P !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I@ ^@ `gdUIox 8;?ch  8<><=%ŽhS\hV1CJaJhV1CJaJh>>䴳>䴳P䴳<CJaJh,S#CJaJhHN4CJaJh#dhHN4>*CJaJhACJaJhUIohUIo>*CJaJhUIohUIoCJaJhUIoCJaJ4  78vwghhi=>tu gdV1 & F ^gd< gd> ^gd> & F ^gdm |^`|gdHN4 gdUIo%*,jq|Q^* + , - / 0 U [ \ ߿|th\ThhKCJaJh hHN4>*CJaJh h >*CJaJh CJaJhHN4hHN4CJaJhHN4hHN45CJaJh*'CJPJaJh%&CJPJaJhZJCJPJaJhZJCJOJPJQJaJhV1CJaJhZJCJaJhS\CJaJh*'CJaJhS\hV1CJaJh({h\CJaJh({hV1CJaJ+ , ] !""+"," gd q ^gdr3 ^gdA & F ^gd? |^`|gdHN4 ^gdZJ gdZJ & F ^gd<\ ] !""""*","""6#7#.$<$M$[$z$$%% %/%6%m%%%%%ź͖͊͊͊͞ź~rjajYh|tCJaJh|t>*CJaJhSCJaJhShS>*CJaJhHN4hHN4>*CJaJh|th5CJaJhPkCJaJh*'CJaJh qCJaJh qh q>*CJaJhHN4hHN4CJaJhACJaJhCJaJh?h?CJaJh?CJaJh,yCJaJh>!CJaJhHN4CJaJ ,"7##%%1%2%n%%%%%5AIHQ^^aaddff p^pgdC gd8S gdHN4 ^gdA & F ^gdA%%'/'**J/X/00 1111444.4;444f5g58899;;;;;E<F<G<K<R<@@4A5AQAXAA BjCnCtC{CCCCCCC GGGGHHIHHHNOPhiCJaJhCCJaJhCh CJaJh%dCJaJh({CJaJh({h\CJaJh CJaJh({hCCJaJh*'CJaJhChCCJaJ@PP"Q*QQQxSSSSU UUVWWWWYYZZZZ[ [U[]#]]]^^ccdfff=fgghhhhhjjkkk l l\l]lm!m%mŽ͵h({h\CJaJh({hCJaJhCJaJh(CJaJh2RCJaJh{CJaJh|};CJaJhSCJaJhCCJaJhChCCJaJhiCJaJ:f]l^l q qttttOuRuuuuuuuuww @ ^@ gdYO gd8S gdA p^pgdLA gdr# @ ^@ gdS p^pgdC%m)m.m?memgmn q q.q/qqrrssttttttttNuOuQuVuuuŽ͵{sh_WKhShS>*CJaJh-CCJaJhr 5CJaJhLAhwVCJaJhLACJaJhS5CJaJhwV5CJaJhShS5CJaJhr#5CJaJhSCJaJhChCJaJhwVCJaJhFyCJaJhGCJaJh%dCJaJhCJaJh( CJaJhCJaJhiCJaJh({hiCJaJuuuuuuvvwwwwwwwwx!x3x4xxxxxzz {{{v|}|~||||||||ºڲ²’º²{mb²hHhHCJaJhHhH5>*CJaJhHhH7CJaJh({h\CJaJh({hm CJaJhi5CJaJh>hH5CJaJhHCJaJhiCJaJhm CJaJhhPRCJaJhm7CJaJhYOCJaJhSCJaJh:>*CJaJhShS>*CJaJ&wwwxx3x4xnxox|||||-}Y}Z}}}~}}}}}}}~ @ ^@ gdm gdm  @ ^@ gdYO||^}}}}}}}}}~~C~BJyzõ~pdXdpOhh%CJ\aJh({h\CJ\aJh({hFe CJ\aJhFe hFe 5CJ\aJhXCJ\aJhFe CJ\aJhFe hFe >*CJ\aJhphp>*CJ\aJhpCJ\aJhph>5CJ\aJhphp5CJ\aJh>h>>*CJ\aJh>h>5CJ\aJh>CJ\aJhm CJ\aJ~~D~E~^~_~CDz{gh p^pgd gdh% @ ^@ gdFe gdm fRSU\e)c=ܤݤޤ%'ż༳ΪΆΆΆ}}o}}d}h^EH5CJ\aJh^EHh^EH5CJ\aJh^EHCJ\aJhTwCJ\aJh*CJ\aJ'hSTefݤޤ p^pgdM# p^pgd  զħЧѧا٧ݧʳ{sgs[RJhPkCJaJhPk5CJaJhHN4hb>*CJaJh%h%>*CJaJh%CJaJhHN4CJaJhh%CJaJhb,CJaJhHN4hHN4>*CJaJhHN4hHN4CJaJhDNCJ\aJh&h&5CJ\aJhXCJ\aJh&CJ\aJh^EH5CJ\aJh^EHCJ\aJhX5CJ\aJh&hX5CJ\aJbc٧ڧl6 Y`0p@ P !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I^gdb2 Y`0p@ P !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF IgdHN4 ]^gd% p^pgdM# p^pgdX  /134;<=BOQXabcǿϷϷϷϷϝ}r}h%d0JmHnHuhb hb0Jjhb0JUh%>pjh%>pU haah7haahSCJaJhw!&CJaJh= CJaJh8SCJaJhh%CJaJhaah= CJaJhF1hF1CJaJhPkhb,CJaJhPkCJaJhACJaJ*<=bc&`#$ & F p@ P@&^`Pgdw!& & F p@ P@&^`Pgd=  & Fgd= & F^gdF1 & FgdHN4 & F p@ P@&^`Pgdw!&&`#$5 01h:pw!&/ =!8"*#$% ^, H02 0@P`p2( 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p8XV~_HmH nH sH tH @`@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH PP  Heading 1$ & F @& >*CJaJRR  Heading 2$ & F@&^5CJ\aJHH  Heading 3$ & F@& >*CJaJJJ  Heading 4$ & F@&5CJ\aJZZ  Heading 5$ & F@&]^5CJ\aJDA`D Default Paragraph FontViV  Table Normal :V 44 la (k (No List X/X Level 17$8$H$^OJQJ_HaJmH sH tH X/X Level 4@ 7$8$H$^@ OJQJ_HaJmH sH tH X/X Level 3p7$8$H$^pOJQJ_HaJmH sH tH X/"X Level 57$8$H$^OJQJ_HaJmH sH tH XC2X Body Text Indent ^ >*CJaJ6BB6 Body TextCJaJ4 @R4 Footer  !.)@a. Page NumberXRrX Body Text Indent 2 & F^CJaJ6U6 Hyperlink >*B*phXSX Body Text Indent 3 & F^CJaJB>@B %Title$L^La$5CJ\aJFVF FollowedHyperlink >*B* phZYZ  Document Map-D M CJOJQJ^JaJtN1t Body Text First Indent 2 hx^h` >*CJaJ@@ WP9_Title $1$a$5aJh^h 0 Normal (Web)&ddd[$\$]^CJOJQJaJ*W* Strong5\66 level1!dd[$\$H"H  Balloon Text"CJOJQJ^JaJ$1$ X7objectfBf 6 List Paragraph$d^m$CJOJPJQJ^JaJ:Q: hm Title Char5CJ\aJH bH 1J No Spacing&CJ_HaJmH sH tH 8q8 5~ object27>*S*Y(phXX 0Ol(-DM &B*fHmHphq sHtHXX 0Li)-DM &B*fHmHphq sHtH.X. N @Emphasis6]<< {moz-txt-underscorePK![Content_Types].xmlj0Eжr(΢Iw},-j4 wP-t#bΙ{UTU^hd}㨫)*1P' ^W0)T9<l#$yi};~@(Hu* Dנz/0ǰ $ X3aZ,D0j~3߶b~i>3\`?/[G\!-Rk.sԻ..a濭?PK!֧6 _rels/.relsj0 }Q%v/C/}(h"O = C?hv=Ʌ%[xp{۵_Pѣ<1H0ORBdJE4b$q_6LR7`0̞O,En7Lib/SeеPK!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xml M @}w7c(EbˮCAǠҟ7՛K Y, e.|,H,lxɴIsQ}#Ր ֵ+!,^$j=GW)E+& 8PK!Ptheme/theme/theme1.xmlYOo6w toc'vuر-MniP@I}úama[إ4:lЯGRX^6؊>$ !)O^rC$y@/yH*񄴽)޵߻UDb`}"qۋJחX^)I`nEp)liV[]1M<OP6r=zgbIguSebORD۫qu gZo~ٺlAplxpT0+[}`jzAV2Fi@qv֬5\|ʜ̭NleXdsjcs7f W+Ն7`g ȘJj|h(KD- dXiJ؇(x$( :;˹! I_TS 1?E??ZBΪmU/?~xY'y5g&΋/ɋ>GMGeD3Vq%'#q$8K)fw9:ĵ x}rxwr:\TZaG*y8IjbRc|XŻǿI u3KGnD1NIBs RuK>V.EL+M2#'fi ~V vl{u8zH *:(W☕ ~JTe\O*tHGHY}KNP*ݾ˦TѼ9/#A7qZ$*c?qUnwN%Oi4 =3ڗP 1Pm \\9Mؓ2aD];Yt\[x]}Wr|]g- eW )6-rCSj id DЇAΜIqbJ#x꺃 6k#ASh&ʌt(Q%p%m&]caSl=X\P1Mh9MVdDAaVB[݈fJíP|8 քAV^f Hn- "d>znNJ ة>b&2vKyϼD:,AGm\nziÙ.uχYC6OMf3or$5NHT[XF64T,ќM0E)`#5XY`פ;%1U٥m;R>QD DcpU'&LE/pm%]8firS4d 7y\`JnίI R3U~7+׸#m qBiDi*L69mY&iHE=(K&N!V.KeLDĕ{D vEꦚdeNƟe(MN9ߜR6&3(a/DUz<{ˊYȳV)9Z[4^n5!J?Q3eBoCM m<.vpIYfZY_p[=al-Y}Nc͙ŋ4vfavl'SA8|*u{-ߟ0%M07%<ҍPK! ѐ'theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsM 0wooӺ&݈Э5 6?$Q ,.aic21h:qm@RN;d`o7gK(M&$R(.1r'JЊT8V"AȻHu}|$b{P8g/]QAsم(#L[PK-![Content_Types].xmlPK-!֧6 +_rels/.relsPK-!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK-!Ptheme/theme/theme1.xmlPK-! ѐ' theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK]  %%%( x%\ %P%mu|UWX[]_abdegikm  ,"fw~hVYZ\^`cfhjlno !(!!8@0(  B S  ? >  " @  $  d d" # 43 B | TY# lC $(@ 1" S# " ,C @ ? D> ,$ l$ Fd1 1 777775P5P     i9 9 777779P9P  9*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsplace=*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceName=*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceType9*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsState8 *urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsCity H"  :@PU BHlr  >?  { | .5v|Xc!!##%%**\0b099?9P;V;CCFF*K/KNNVV8Y>YZ ZfgiikkllmmIqMqssxxH@HOW|0 5 ; < { *+I8N8TH\HJJQQVVmmoo7p>pOtUttttt0u7uGxLx333333333333333333333333333%%*,Q'Q',,.,;,,,3333F4G4K4R4Q9X9t;{;??!e%e.i/ikkpprrsswwyy55\e)c%'%%,,.,;,,,33K4R4Q9X9t;{;.i/ikkZ@al'Da$\Tq>VLq^l|EAaVL pR7x({0vhp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ ^@ `OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHhP^P`OJQJo(hHh ^ `OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHhp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ ^@ `OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHhP^P`OJQJo(hHh ^ `OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hH0^`0o(.p0p^p`0o(. L ^ `L.  ^ `.xx^x`.HLH^H`L.^`.^`.L^`L.hp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ ^@ `OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHhP^P`OJQJo(hHh ^ `OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHhp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ ^@ `OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHhP^P`OJQJo(hHh ^ `OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hH^`o(.  ^ `hH.  L^ `LhH. x^x`hH. H^H`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH.88^8`o(.^`. L ^ `L.  ^ `.xx^x`.HLH^H`L.^`.^`.L^`L. ^ `o(.  ^ `hH. xL^x`LhH. H^H`hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. X L^X `LhH.L p'Da$q^Z@q>EAax({a                                    |                fG\  >6*7G,ly#,5ԱIY>ɳ<COom &?KPWce (3KcSYAc&p{9&2;e<rFW2j{Q ^J15;GJZg0&PM^Vl/=>PPlS(e|C 3 m= $P S [ ![ r 1 $   ( ( 0 3 "A L O Q T U c r hr Iy s & T3 F ^ @c w 1 ?( X Fe l z  V& / P `_ a (h +z } #d%5<BJYTZ _"yJ$rT 9!GJJkS=\rC-?/5PNZgef)g3nDxOV>KT[q|uF &>4IpuuY z"9%MmtnK @WZVwRwHK$b*f/' #10M:PCc| @ZD\Fl}5 i$I'04CEhRDqz~ ~CGp |  T"(+8L9X>kpz= k.Tq]$*,Pe-}HBWk`r#sy0 Qpxz\ $4949FGTlmv>  + / 22 x: D L R ]o xo 5~ !K!!1!?5!>!A!,D!Oe!f!k!Jx!}!X~!v""m ""e"2":"K"U"t]"####a8#8#9#A#G#`I#,S#RU#jV#'a#b#f#-y#c$$D$;S$W$jj$% %%%BH%{J%O%O%zW%'_%`%a%h%q%du%{x%x%&&w!&,&--&~4&jd&''E''"'#' ?'\'r'w'3}'6''(L ((I(X(\(_(l(P|(9) ) )})5)9)?)i@)A)B)I)N)*!*/*N*`*q*v*++$,+!D+M+S+T+qU+mX+iy++',8, L,PL,%R,W,1A1vH1V1r1>w1#2 222)62W<2O2'y2!3+3P3\3]3^3b3;g3r3s3~3 4l 4 4U4$4 4HN4i4{4P55Z5/.5-B5K5\5#_5o5U 6 66$6&6X16X6d6u6V"7#7^&7(7.7)H7X7h7m7&8828;8uG8X8Z8m[8[8`8b8e8 r8`r8|8 9v293969T9Y9Id9R$:C.:2:<:?:@:C:e: ;;;D;|G;Y;a;zn;Hp;|};;1<R<ly<"===G=:=M=dd=Bh= >(>2>g^>r>-y>=??&?W*?YN?[?\?q]?c?,~??+@@y @6@N$@)7@L@5S@]@x@A,A@3ACADALAAMAvYAYAvAzAB BRB'B&PBGZBhBjuB~zBVCC C:CdC4C4?CoPC%fC/lCC DH Dq3D6D8VD)gD pDEo EA!E=EHE5XEaEpEYFO FF9F}0F3F8FOHFNFbFumF{F~FnG G\G5G`OG]fG gGiGHH,H>H^EHZH[fH%iHqH8zHzHAIIoIIP5IOBI/PIhWIfIWiI:kI#qIJJJ*J0J1J:J:JBJZJ^JnJyJ}J K*K,K/K/KWKhKjKlKL1 LLL&L7LGL/JLLLXLL)_L%lLftLw{LLY&M)ME?MbLMRMCuMd|M NAN N'N'NDNDNaNqN|NO4COnOrOwOkP P2P=POP\PrPsP{P QE&Q:QAQLQ\QaQgQwQ RR RH&R'R"(R2Rf>RERGReMRqMRMRhPRXRYR]R^RZmRoR8yRDS,Sc SSS?SaJS=YS\S}S T.T%4T9T+=TKVTt[TB\TeTUUUUhU'U+U2U|YUcUiUV2V2VGVl_VvVGW%WC=WZ>WiMWpWtWvXo2XI7XEXRXbXcXsX\YoY#Y#Yr.Y2Y>YKY#QYQYdaYgYoYrY Z3 Z2*Z1Z?9Z}_Z*wZzZp[P[ [d[![)[-[.[d[j[\ \\*\,\Z9\S\]\`\n\Jo\|\U] ]]]*] "].]N4]*I] N],R]_]e]vq] ^^d'^(^j)^g^Bn^v__l%_&_._@_L_` `!`:`GZ`"]`q`|`~}` aga@a.a:aPaRala/ra]xa_xalzab6bNb(b)b2bIHbKbdb8fbfbhblbobbccc])c6c#]cPgcOd#d*bd ed2edhd3jdld5ee)e,e6eFeRei\e=teu f#f:%fDfPfVf!]f gvg gY g$~ghh hjBjKjfjhjkjmj$njc}j kGk-k7/k07k-;k!DkckQskkHlKlf:l:lUlz^lMmlymmDm"mx"m#mO*m5m06m>mNm^mumym` nnn0n0n>nKnWn_nknnn$ohDoUIoPo;Voeo%go2ro^to pp]-p1p%>pHp*SpTpWp1epup( qzqq$q!q/Kq{UqVq_qlqrpr{rrzr2%r%r9rG?rs]OssTsdmsQpst t=tt|t"tt'tl8t;t=tTBtHtRtI^tbtSwteu uU$u2(up2u3u4uNOuX^u9quvvDvJv2MvzRvcveuvvvv]wwQ w ww:w>w"JwyRwTw0]wew{w xxix"9xGxVxd{x y y,ye>ymByKy{fy>tyyazrzzJzozvzC {Z"{*{.{ 1{;A{bC{YJ{3M{3U{Z{+[{c{Xf{Ih{||3|B|F|yg|&q|.}|,}]/}x4}P}i`}b}}} ~~~*:~!=~?~@~{B~P~Q~YS~s~l|~& '2j4B%Eep6=%(J49>]Y_?yY" *7;B]GY[x=;;g06;>DVot{2W36*: AAGKbl}M#<<BOZw^`x-?&-,^[\h? =!0AG=QiNoym k#59JR)W@\an3t4*RX+]mcghhm]nz's>lH`,jjkmq&sx+ANZ*iUn~( 3<69;=C*RYbg} k2wMN{UUc*gmrvY|1r 01p5z8ijlpzU{|%0%2A~FRck~w` :(;<BK[\Pk Q)+1.53DO`6dqpr\!a'd)4>ʶّTf,<IabHkq6:=4GldE^ )0N[6\d,ei w%@B_c"dgau#&2-37AMU$] `pFt 9$04?tAZUpw}xKR24:km6(fgp{z  U W"")2HDQty&4?LVm{ m#IT(1Q@pmd 19:cBtv+.I:HHWc$>rA]Ncok,!7d8;L_TCW[dk|T= 6-HPcctu%yi  .IGJ N^fiv|%b&TE8SWp qOu|D}~c' IYOWWmIs!uy|!1NRT'WY]Vd[ >ݴ9٦ܰ!$3/455NOP0]fn 58C|o h%4J49rf|)2>6IS#X_c+ I8t /:fPo2JJVY i%4{8Cf ,.6V<>P^]vN(6PKUegqo"4DDO^do@~ 0?{5K6WX&ghr;ss0y|'*}9;FH\\sd ,z2 CDElHEXl)n%x'T/AEjI[l({ 805;BMS@V']b| |%IJaa3mn(#54{MFeqz j![03FMMT]d@ir3"*OS"W?x#%&`5B(HLOVWogqhr|{ B$'O.k/6H?]BBC@CoNp*Z*IYi4jsJvvwnyZ97#?()^,37D,OZd# 2V==KWyX^`dzwxZ  "&&41j5 C%CYO[{AE ~0:FJSZh@jyV&|+<@ \o3qXxkn&CC?DPaQWU2|W# 0[0DJ[aViq jt&36:8G7I~\ ~ U"X6w?\EWW_t%b B+(A&DWN Rdi|xx6 (4JiN^_p[t}m{.D7;LL]RU l{n} E>Vc jN!%M24>Ol$.107779ɳqs)1?C+ʱ±!*'&&<=0?CH``h ,q3P=NCIMVdH2!<?oqqq " Z$4i\`Gccs|J/3<:F@ZiOjq| )_BKYj--I$LVYqEs[, @/26;@F:IONQ'`b'0FT{N 1J;6KS[\^v#.d@@_K0t~.P2O4?%J;7#DhR~]ipqv}Pu'*=4@]JJPrt7=T%X<eDFeh.y09o?TXg3rz r#477KMSVFaZj?qnz 9#$N& 4R\b_kffnw&]4@LDMWio <z!&/Q]a^oi!A7]FUX&~ x >HP:mn )M-<EBI['..0178LxZ]_ilmUw<88;#Q\aTbflN0O%b/k`a)dklLq Ue1i.57C@mG*_Jjz.4EZ  ,<]\MeGjnhotYy#=1sHHINTcIdloo8:)H_cO%{%g(x5NPT WW@Y[rb.2p)<6:RV"?1 $2 >No_mFyy)24`8FKuoBqN 27s?d{s f&_%devs@kk@kkP@Unknown G* Times New Roman5Symbol3. * Arial7.{ @Calibri71 Courier5. *aTahoma7.  Verdana?= * Courier New;WingdingsACambria Math"qhFVFVF) R# R#824dGG 3qHX ?@Z2! xxWESTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY Annette Hamm Annette Hamm,        Oh+'0 $ D P \ ht|WESTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITYAnnette Hamm Normal.dotmAnnette Hamm3Microsoft Office Word@6F@s#@,;@s# ՜.+,0 hp  鶹 Illinois University#RG WESTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY Title  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnoprstuvwxyz{|}~Root Entry F#1TableqmWordDocument7SummaryInformation(DocumentSummaryInformation8CompObjy  F'Microsoft Office Word 97-2003 Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q