ࡱ> #` bjbjmm 1%: : : : : : : N EEE8E FtN FF"FFFGGG)++++++$hO: mLGGmLmLO: : FFdQQQmL: F: F)QmL)QQBE: : F~F Up?AEOH f4z0ofzYPzz: GVHQIJGGGOO)QdGGGmLmLmLmLN N N )N N N )N N N : : : : : :  WESTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY Regular Meeting of the FACULTY SENATE Tuesday, 18 September 2007 4:00 p.m. Capitol Rooms - University Union A C T I O N M I N U T E S SENATORS PRESENT: L. Baker-Sperry, C. Blackinton, V. Boynton, L. Brice, J. Clough, D. Connelly, K. Daytner, J. Deitz, K. Hall, R. Hironimus-Wendt, V. Jelatis, M. Maskarinec, L. Meloy, N. Miczo, D. Mummert, R. Ness, R. Orwig, G. Pettit, S. Rock, M. Siddiqi, B. Sonnek Ex-officio: B. Baily, Associate Provost; T. Kaul, Parliamentarian SENATORS ABSENT: K. Clontz GUESTS: Cheryl Bailey, Amy Carr, John Chisholm, Sean Cordes, Judi Dallinger, Roberta Davilla, Al DeRoos, Dennis DeVolder, Sharon Evans, Annette Glotfelty, Rodney Greer, Ken Hawkinson, Bill Knox, Phyllida Kornoski, Ilon Lauer, Candace McLaughlin, John Miller, Kathleen ODonnell-Brown, Nancy Parsons, Polly Radosh, Cindy Ridle, Phyllis Rippey, Joe Rives, Alice Robertson, Jim Schmidt, Joseph Schmidt, Phyllis Self, Aimee Shouse, Bonnie Smith-Skripps, Linda Tomlinson, Ed Woell, David Zarolla I. Consideration of Minutes 4 September 2007 There were two typos in the minutes of September 4: participant in the second to last line on page 2, and immediate in the last sentence of the second to last paragraph of page 3. Additionally, the third paragraph of page 4 should indicate that Chairperson Rock asked if the Virginia Tech report contained suggestions that might be useful for 鶹. APPROVED AS CORRECTED II. A. Approvals from the Provost 1. Requests for New Courses a. COMM 425, Health Communication, 3 s.h. b. DAN 316, Musical Theatre Dance, 2 s.h. 2. Requests for 鶹 in Majors a. Elementary Education b. Musical Theatre 3. Request for Change in Minor a. Coaching B. Provosts Report Associate Provost Baily told senators that a routine NCA site visit will be conducted in April to assess the Ed.D. in Educational Leadership, now in its second year. Associate Provost Baily reported that the Registrars office is working with Craig DeMoss in University Information Management Services (UIMS) to assure that student contact information is accurate and up-to-date in the event of an emergency. C. SGA Report (Phyllida Kornoski, SGA representative to Faculty Senate) The Student Government Association held a two-day retreat last weekend at Horn Field Campus in order to establish goals for the year. The SGA Education Committee met with advisor Estelle Plewa about ideas for making tutoring easier to access for students. SGA is preparing a directory about Macomb for freshmen and transfer students. Political Science Chair Richard Hardy spoke to SGA about getting involved in the mock election. D. Other Announcements 1. Nominating petitions are requested for an opening on the University Personnel Committee (UPC) for the College of Arts and Sciences to serve a three-year term. UPC representatives must be full, tenured professors. Petitions are available on the Senate website and should be returned by 4 p.m. Friday, September 21 to the Faculty Senate office. 2. Kevin Hall has volunteered to serve as the representative of the College of Business and Technology on the Committee on Provost and Presidential Performance. 3. Phyllis Self, Dean, University Libraries Dean Self told senators that changes in the 鶹 Libraries mirror changes occurring in libraries across the country. She stated that upon her arrival a year ago, books and journal circulation statistics were down while electronic reserves were increasing. Dean Self added that the storage facilities of the Library archives were in a disastrous situation, very dark with no temperature and humidity controls. Dean Self wants to digitize more of 鶹s historical and university documents. Work began this past summer to weed little used materials that were impacted with the growth of mold in the Libraries storage facilities. Dean Selfs goal is to revitalize library spaces and services, to provide collaborative spaces for students to work in groups as well as to create individual quiet spaces. She indicated there is a greater need currently for computers and electronic databases and journals, and access versus ownership issues at the local and national levels. University Libraries conducted both formal and informal assessments to help guide their improvements, and focus groups of students and faculty will be established in the four academic colleges in October. Dean Self has met with chairs across the University and is meeting with SGA next week. In summer 2007, work began on the first floor of the Malpass Library, which received new carpeting and wall coverings as well as the addition of a coffee bar to draw people into the facility. Dean Self stated the dark first floor audiovisual facilities were gutted, and outdated equipment such as many opaque projectors were moved to appropriate University locations or eliminated. Room 180 was renovated as a high technology classroom for administrators and faculty to use, and a fifth floor faculty lounge was added to the Malpass Library, equipped with Macs and PCs, a scanner and printers, a smart board, and a small adjoining room in which to hold meetings. There are currently 15 laptops available for sign out by faculty and staff which can be used anywhere in the Malpass Library. University Libraries includes four additional libraries in addition to Malpass Library: the Music Library, Physical Sciences Library, Curriculum Library, and the 鶹QC Library, all of which, according to Dean Self, need to be revitalized. So far, new computers have been obtained for the Music Library and new furniture in the Curriculum Library. Dean Self distributed a Proposal to Form an Information Literacy Review Committee to senators. The proposal recommends that Faculty Senate form an ad hoc study committee to conduct a thorough investigation into the current state of information literacy practices at 鶹 and across higher education. Dean Self suggested the committee should discuss whether 鶹 should develop a University strategy to ensure graduates can use information confidently and ways to address areas of concern. Library professor Sean Cordes stated that while people may consider this a library initiative, at most institutions that endorse information literacy it is driven by faculty as part of a movement to educate students on applying skills to solve problems. SGA representative Phyllida Kornoski told Dean Self that students are concerned about the Librarys hours of operation during finals week, and SGA may bring forward a request for 24-hour operation during that time period. Dean Self responded that the Library has examined this issue and would be happy to be open 24 hours during finals, but a lack of resources has prevented this. She pointed out that the services of persons other than student help, such as a security guard, would be needed to effect this change. Dean Self also stated the recent increase in the minimum wage hit the Library hard since the facility has a $250,000 student help budget and has not received any additional funds in this area. Senator Siddiqi asked if there are plans to expand the physical facilities of the Malpass Library since the areas for faculty research are limited and study carrels are mostly assigned to students. Dean Self responded that following an ad hoc committee recommendation, a call went out to faculty inquiring about the need for study carrels, and all who indicated a need were provided with one. She stated the carrels were divided between visiting scholars, graduate students, persons with disabilities, and faculty. Faculty still wishing carrels should contact Mary Day in the Library. Senator Siddiqi inquired if there are plans to bring more books online. He stated that he often has to borrow books from other libraries, and more online books would facilitate research. Dean Self responded that although University Libraries have access to NetLibrary, it is not very user friendly, sometimes only allowing four hours to read a book online. Although publishers are examining ways to solve this problem, she stated that NetLibrary is probably the best means of accessing books online at this time. Dean Self added that faster delivery methods for books from state university libraries are being examined, and she hopes that a method for 24-hour delivery can be established. Joe Rives stated that the University Master Plan included an extension from Stipes Hall to the Library; although that was originally envisioned as an area for CAIT, he stated it could be used to expand Library space. 4. Plus-Minus Grading (Al DeRoos, Registrar) Mr. DeRoos reminded senators that a year and a half ago, Faculty Senate approved plus-minus grading for the University by a 9-7 vote, contingent upon UIMS migrating to the DB2 system. The Registrars office is now in a position to begin programming for plus-minus grading, but Mr. DeRoos told senators there are some academic concerns for which he needs guidance from Faculty Senate. Many of the concerns stem from questions regarding how C- grades will be handled: if students will be allowed to progress to the next level within their majors or enter majors with gateways with a C- grade, and if this is a departmental or a University concern. Other issues stem from a vote by the Graduate Council not to adopt plus-minus grading, which leads to questions of how to handle undergraduates taking graduate classes and vice versa. Mr. DeRoos had hoped that the old grade collection system of bubble sheets could be replaced with an electronic collection system prior to converting to plus-minus grading so that the bubble sheets and scanners would not have to be adapted to plus-minus at all. He stated that it would be ideal if the Registrars office and UIMS could concentrate on electronic collection this year and plus-minus grading next year, with the entire process completed in approximately another year and a half. Senator Maskarinec asked if Senate should re-examine the question of plus-minus grading since there will be two grading systems on campus once it is operational. Senator Hall stated that senators could now make more of an informed decision about plus-minus grading, reflecting it seemed more of an ideal two years ago and the ramifications of its adoption could not be foreseen at that time. Senator Brice noted that the ramifications of plus-minus grading now are precisely the same as those two years ago, and added that President Goldfarb approved without delay plus-minus grading when presented to him by Faculty Senate. He suggested that if senators wish to revisit the previous decision, an ad hoc committee should be established to bring a report back to Senate on implementation considerations. Senator Jelatis noted that when previously discussed, plus-minus grading was supported based upon student needs and how faculty felt they could best encourage higher levels of learning. She discouraged senators from making decisions based largely upon whether or not it is difficult to change the infrastructure of the University but on what is best for students education. Mr. DeRoos told senators that as the migration of the University to the DB2 system was undertaken, plans were already in place to take into account plus-minus conversion, whether or not Faculty Senate or the Graduate Council supported it. Screens, for instance, will be expanded to allow for the additional symbol, regardless of whether plus-minus is officially supported at the time of the conversion or not. Ms. Kornoski told senators that plus-minus grading has been brought up a lot in SGA, and that students are looking forward to it and would be willing to help in any way possible to make it a reality. Senator Boynton noted that 鶹 is the first university she has taught at that does not offer plus-minus grading, so other institutions have found ways to tackle the issue. Senator Boynton stated that how to handle C- grades should be a decision for individual departments. Senator Ness asserted that the most practical solution would be that students are assigned a specific grading system based upon how they are classified, and Mr. DeRoos concurred that the solution could be as simple as this. He stated that the system could be set up so that pluses and minuses would not be accepted for students with graduate status. Associate Provost Baily stated that how the different students would be treated would be a policy decision. Senator Siddiqi remarked that if resources are needed to address the difference in expectations between the two-to-three years the Registrar believes it will take to complete the conversion and student desires to complete it sooner, the University administration should be given a message by Faculty Senate to consider assigning those resources. Mr. DeRoos clarified it will probably only be about a year before electronic grade collection is completed and work could begin on the plus-minus system, if both did not have to be done simultaneously. Senator Maskarinec remarked that allowing faculty members to choose whether to utilize plus-minus grading for undergraduate students could be a dynamic part of the program and would not be much more difficult to program. He stated that previously there was some discussion of allowing faculty to choose whether to utilize the new grading system or not. It was noted that a specific grading system was approved to be used with plus-minus, starting with an A grade, and continuing through A-, B+, B, B- until reaching the grade of F. It was additionally noted that there was no numeric equivalent assigned to these grades in the version approved by Faculty Senate and the President. Chairperson Rock stated that a 2005 survey of students showed that they did not support plus-minus grading at that time and asked how the SGA representative knows that students support it now. Ms. Kornoski responded that SGA has heard from many undergraduate students wanting to see plus-minus implemented. She said that student interest was what brought the subject back to the table at SGA. Senator Brice asked Faculty Senate to establish a working group or committee to give the Registrar direction on some of the policies, procedures, and other decisions involved with completing the plus-minus conversion. Senator Brice volunteered to serve on such a committee. Motion: That Faculty Senate support the development of a committee to assist the Registrar in implementing the plus-minus grading system (Orwig/Jelatis) MOTION APPROVED 19 YES 2 NO 0 AB Senators asked if the specific configuration of the committee and a timeline for its work should be established at this time. Chairperson Rock volunteered that the Executive Committee could develop suggestions to bring back to senators at the October 2 meeting. 5. Joe Rives, Assistant to the President for Budget and Planning Dr. Rives told senators this is an exciting time in classroom technology, and the Presidents Technology Users Group would like all technology classrooms to move toward a goal of consistency. Dr. Rives stated that faculty will soon be hearing about a technology computer enhancement program with the goal of establishing a dependable rotation for replacement of outdated computers. He told senators that about half of 鶹s computers date from the previous century, and the Technology Users Group has set a goal of two years to bring all 鶹 technology into the current century, followed by a four-year replacement rotation so that faculty will know when their computer is scheduled for replacement. Technology classrooms have increasingly been using clickers, remote control devices, some of which operate on radio frequencies, which allow students to respond to questions, quizzes and tests, polls, attendance, etc., with responses automatically captured and tabulated on computer. College of Arts and Sciences (COAS) Associate Dean Jim Schmidt stated the Technology Users Group wishes to avoid students having to purchase different types of clickers for different classes. They recommend that 鶹 buy a clicker system from E-Instruction Company, one of four that the committee considered. Dr. Schmidt stated this company will provide all of the receivers and software support free to the University in return for adoption of its system. Students would be allowed to purchase new or used clickers: the Bookstores cost would be $15 per unit, and students could sell the clicker back to the Bookstore or to other students. Students would additionally be charged a registration fee for use of the clicker: $15 per semester, or $35 for a lifetime registration, to be used with as many classes as needed. Senator Deitz asked if the clickers could be used outside of classrooms, such as for a debate or mock election. Dr. Schmidt responded that they can be used outside of classrooms; the only problem with using it in some situations is that all students would have had to purchase a registration in order to use the clickers. When asked how many faculty are currently using clickers in their classrooms, Dr. Rives responded not more than half. Dr. Schmidt stated his College has used clickers during summer orientation for the past two years; he added that both parents and students really like clickers and instantly see the applications of them. Senator Connelly asked if incoming freshmen would be able to use the same clicker for four years of college if they purchase a lifetime registration. Dr. Schmidt stated they should be able to rely on this for at least four years. He said if the University decides on a different system in four to five years, the institution will not have invested much money in E-Instruction, which is not the case with the other systems considered by the committee. When asked who to contact to begin using clickers, Dr. Rives responded that a system will be developed for this process once the committee obtains endorsements from Faculty Senate and SGA. Motion: To endorse the one-clicker standard (Meloy/Pettit) MOTION APPROVED 19 YES 0 NO 2 AB III. Reports of Committees and Councils A. Committee on Committees (CoC) (Kevin Hall, Chair) SENATE COUNCILS AND COMMITTEES: Writing Instruction in the Disciplines Committee Ilon Lauer, Communication replacing Diana Green 10 FA&C UNIVERSITY COUNCILS: Amethyst Council Joseph Schmitz, Communication new position 09 FA&C Illinois Board of Higher Education Faculty Advisory Council Dean Zoerink, RPTA replacing Joan Livingston-Webber 07-08 Alternate University Honors Council Emran Khan, LEJA replacing Katharine Pawelko Fall 07 E&HS UNIVERSITY COMMITTEES: Center for Innovation in Teaching and Research Advisory Committee Michael Stryker, Music replacing Kimberley Carlos 09 FA&C AD HOC COMMITTEES: Higher Values in Higher Education Review/Update Team Julia Albarracin, Political Science new position A&S Fred Isele, Curriculum & Instruction new position E&HS Carolyn Blackinton, Theatre/Dance new position FA&C Sean Cordes, Library new position Library ALL NOMINEES WERE DECLARED ELECTED IV. Old Business A. Proposed Bylaws Change for the Council for General Education The General Education Review Committee (GERC) proposal would clarify the Council on General Education (CGE) membership: For the two members representing category I, one member must teach courses on college writing and one representative must teach public speaking. For the two members representing category IV, one member must teach courses in the Fine Arts and one representative must teach courses in the Humanities. Categories V and VI shall each have one representative selected from the disciplines offered in those categories. Additionally, the change to the Bylaws would add to CGE Duties, To communicate at the beginning of the academic year to administrators and faculty the writing requirement for all courses in the General Education Curriculum. It would remove from the Duties, To review and plan baccalaureate skills assessment, and to make appropriate recommendations to the Faculty Senate. Section m. of the Duties was changed to read, To develop and offer programs, in conjunction with other University agencies when appropriate, to foster awareness and understanding of General Education, to inform General Education instructors about specific pedagogical practices well-suited to general education courses, and to educate General Education instructors about writing as a pedagogy. BYLAWS CHANGES APPROVED 18 YES 1 NO 1 AB V. New Business A. General Education Review Committee (GERC) (Aimee Shouse, Chair) 1. Final Report Chairperson Rock stated that in response to a call for faculty to provide input regarding the final GERC report, he received only one response, a letter from a retired professor who was instrumental in establishing the W requirement and feels strongly that it should remain. Senator Boynton stated that the W requirement was originally established because there did not seem to be a culture of writing at 鶹, and the fact that there are insufficient numbers of writing-intensive courses only reinforces the need to retain the requirement. She added that one of the reasons mentioned for abolishing the former University Writing Exam was that 鶹 still required students to take W courses. Dr. Shouse disagreed that there is not a writing culture at 鶹, stating that eight years ago CGE did a survey which showed that most faculty were offering writing in their courses and she does not think that has changed. She added that there has always been a writing requirement in Gen Ed courses, and if the W requirement is not abolished, Faculty Senate needs to find an alternative way to develop more of these courses. University Advising and Academic Support Services Director Candace McLaughlin stated that she hears from many students about inconsistencies in the way that the W requirement is applied, and that professors are applying intensive writing whether or not it is within a W class. She added that GERC is not asking Faculty Senate to do away with writing at the University but with the W that makes it difficult for students to meet their graduation requirements. History professor Ed Woell read a petition to the Faculty Senate signed by 14 of the 15 professors in his department opposing elimination of the W requirement. The petition lists five points against removal of the W: 1) That the GERC report provides no compelling reason for dropping the W requirement and concluded that it could not determine the requirements effectiveness; 2) That the report concludes that the W requirement poses an unreasonable hurdle for students because so few sections of W courses are being offered, but did not explore or explain why so few faculty offer W sections; 3) That the report is purposely vague about the mechanism for enforcing writing requirements for most sections of General Education courses, with no mention of sanctions if a section does not meet this guideline; 4) That many of the reports recommendations are rooted in the administrative model of assessment, which is highly arbitrary, capricious, and innately discriminatory toward academic disciplines that value ideas and their written and oral expression over utilitarian knowledge and its practical application; and 5) That the recommended system for determining whether the goals of General Education are being met is rife with the potential for conflicts of interest and biased evaluation. Dr. Shouse responded that GERC did not recommend eliminating the W requirement because the committee could not prove it was effective but because of the difficulty of its administration. She stated that GERC trusts that faculty will continue to require writing in their courses and that to suggest that elimination of the W requirement will cause faculty to drop writing is insulting. She concluded that GERC assumes that faculty will continue to require writing because it is important. Ms. Kornoski told senators that she tries to only take one writing-intensive class per semester, but it feels as though all of her courses are writing intensive. She feels 鶹 faculty do a good job of conveying that writing is instrumental to learning. Senator Baker-Sperry, who formerly chaired GERC, stated that discussion of the W requirement was painful and intensive and the committee spent many meetings discussing ways to combat the languishing W. She stated GERC then began to discuss infusing Gen Ed curriculum with writing as a whole. Senator Baker-Sperry stated that if the GERC report is accepted and the W is exchanged for writing across the Gen Ed curriculum, then Faculty Senates responsibility will be to determine if this is being manifested, perhaps through assessment, and to ensure that a culture of writing is being maintained. COAS Associate Dean Jim Schmidt, who also serves on GERC, stated that discussions in the committee showed that the W requirement exhibited a paradoxically opposite effect than intended because it encouraged students and faculty to think that only W courses require significant writing, whereas many courses with a W designation required less writing than those without it. GERC member and English professor Alice Robertson told senators she was unwilling to give up the W requirement without being assured that there was to be more writing, not less, in the General Education curriculum, and the Gen Ed documents were changed to reflect this. Dr. Woell remarked that it seems to be the general consensus that one of the problems is enforcement of the standards that 鶹 currently has. He stated that if the standards now are not being enforced, there is no guarantee that future standards will be enforced so he questions why those standards are being lowered. CGE chair Phyllis Rippey stated that at their meeting last week, CGE established two subcommittees, one of which is charged to develop a plan to have the Council foster a culture of writing at 鶹. Dr. Rippey noted that CGE always had this responsibility but had not taken it on as a deliberate action to the extent that it plans to in the future. She stated this subcommittee will develop a plan to determine what types of writing are occurring at 鶹, ways to encourage writing, and means to educate faculty to make this an integral part of the Gen Ed curriculum. Dr. Rippey stated this will be accomplished in a much more systematic fashion than formerly. She informed senators that a second CGE subcommittee was established to examine assessment of Gen Ed. This subcommittee will take concrete steps to make informed judgments about student learning in regards to Gen Ed and particularly in regards to writing. She stated CGE believes it is to be instrumental in sustaining a culture of writing at 鶹. Senator Hironimus-Wendt stated that elimination of the W will not reduce the amount of writing in his classroom or that of many others but will get rid of students punch card that they have to carry with them to graduate. Ms. Kornoski remarked that elimination of the requirement will not eliminate intensive writing but just that students will not longer have to look for the intensive writing since it will be infused throughout all courses. Senator Jelatis pointed out that the W requirement does not only require intensive writing but also involves the rewrite process revising, obtaining feedback, and improving student writing over the course of the semester. CGE Vice Chair Amy Carr explained that the W requirement requires that at least 50 percent of the class grade will be dependent upon writing, both in class and out-of-class composition. She added that faculty teaching W courses must offer written comments and the opportunity for revision, meaning that a W course could currently be structured entirely of one essay on a multiple choice exam. Senator Maskarinec remarked that when serving on GERC, he was surprised how low the writing requirements were for some Gen Ed courses, and he supports strengthening the language requiring writing in all of them. Dr. Shouse pointed out that the GERC report recommends (p. 17 & 18) that for courses with an enrollment of 50 or fewer, students should have at least one written assignment with written or oral feedback from the instructor with an opportunity for revision, while for courses with an enrollment over 50, students should, as a minimum, write short informal essays or responses to the course material that does not require feedback from the instructor. Math professor John Chisholm remarked that his discipline is an awkward model, and that requiring revisions and feedback as a uniform model for the natural sciences may not be a good idea. Dean Bonnie Smith-Skripps asked if department personnel committees could be empowered to check if faculty are following writing directives. Chairperson Rock responded it should be up to administrators and department chairs to see that this is happening. Associate Provost Baily said she does not see how this could be part of departmental criteria. She added that curriculum is the responsibility of the department chair and the faculty, and the department chair should make sure that the expectations for classes are clear. Senator Ness asked if existing Gen Ed courses were to be reevaluated for inclusion if the standards specified in the GERC report are approved. Dr. Shouse responded that curriculum review has been performed by the Council for the past four to five years, but no systematic examination of every Gen Ed course is planned. She explained that the GERC report recommends guidelines only, and they would be enforced similar to the enforcement of the W requirement, adding that no one ever checked that the syllabus for her W course met the standards for that requirement. Dr. Shouse stated that enforcement is difficult and that CGE is not the body to do that. Senator Hironimus-Wendt pointed out that one of the requirements for retention, tenure and promotion is indications of strength in pedagogy, so that evaluation is happening departmentally. Motion: That Faculty Senate should support the portion of the GERC report affecting the W requirement (charge 4.) (Meloy/Ness) Senator Jelatis warned against voting on portions of the report piecemeal, stating that it is not known how this will impact other portions of the report. Motion: To call the question (Baker-Sperry) MOTION TO CALL THE QUESTION APPROVED 20 YES 1 NO 0 AB MOTION TO ACCEPT THE GERC RECOMMENDATION UNDER CHARGE 4. APPROVED 17 YES 2 NO 2 AB Senator Blackinton asked for clarification of the GERC recommendations regarding Gen Ed category IV, which the committee is recommending be renamed Humanities and Fine Arts. The GERC report recommends that of the 9 s.h. required in this category, 3 s.h. be taken from a Fine Arts discipline with 6 s.h. taken from departments in the Humanities. The GERC report explains that during fall 2006, College of Fine Arts and Communication Dean Paul Kreider and Associate Dean Ken Hawkinson pointed out to GERC that 鶹 is the only public university in Illinois not requiring that students take a fine arts class. Dr. Shouse explained that GERC agreed to require one course from Humanities and one from Fine Arts, but this was changed to require two Humanities courses at the request of the College of Arts and Sciences two days before the report was finalized. Senator Blackinton asked about courses in the Fine Arts dealing with subjects in Humanities. Dr. Shouse stated that GERC had perceived this category as being defined by departments. Senator Blackinton remarked that by using departments as the defining criteria, one Broadcasting course will be left out, but Broadcasting Chair Sharon Evans stated that is not a problem with her department. Senator Blackinton inquired about language stating that History Teacher Education and Elementary Education majors can appeal to CGE for an exception to the Fine Arts requirement. The GERC report states that the exception is based upon the required curricula for these departments. Dr. Shouse stated she does not recommend that CGE haphazardly give exceptions to the criteria but that they be considered on a case-by-case basis. Senator Blackinton questioned revised wording in the Guidelines and General Criteria for Inclusion of Courses in General Education Curriculum, which states that Courses from other departments may also be designated a Fine Arts course, as long as the course content is consistent with the above definition. Dr. Shouse explained that a course outside of the three specified departments Art, Music and Theatre/Dance could request to be part of the Fine Arts category and would be considered by CGE on a case-by-case basis. She stated an example of such a course might be one on African American Theatre housed in the African American Studies department. B. Funding for Travel and Research This agenda item was not discussed due to lack of time. Motion: To adjourn (Brice/Pettit) MOTION APPROVED 15 YES 5 NO 1 AB The Faculty Senate adjourned at 5:58 p.m. Darlos Mummert, Secretary Annette Hamm, Faculty Senate Recording Secretary     PAGE  PAGE 3 3ABK\      : ? $$t%w%%%%&((())@@.ATAbBBNN O3O4O9O[O]O^O_ObOyOOOOO$P7P9P:PKPPPQ h@ZCJ hK>* hK>*CJhK5>*CJhK56CJ hK6CJ hK5CJ hKCJhKMB]^h   . /  & F^  ^ `@&$a$$@&a$@& FGnX4 b `0X8Tp@ P !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I2 _`0X8T@ P !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I9 \`0X8p@ P !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I@ ^@ ` `nNHB^ `: _`0X8Tp@ P !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I@ ^@ `: _`0X8T@ P !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I@ ^@ `: _`0X8Tp@ P !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I@ ^@ `\$AB` p0^p`0  & F^ & F0^^:;#!$!##;&<&)))))B-C-3/4/3366A;B;=p^p p0^p`0==}?~?@@-A.ATAUA\B]BBBeEfEIILLMLNN O O3O4O]O^O & Fp^p^OOOOOOO#P$P9P:PKPPPPQQQZQ[QrQsQQ |]|^` L]L^` 0]0^` ^` QQ[QpQsQQQRRR:RS=SASMSTSS TTTUUUUVWWWXXXXXXX$Yjj(s,s~~܉!<c мммвв hK0JjhK0JUjhKU hK5 hK6CJhK hK7CJ h@Z5CJ hK5CJhK5>*CJ hKCJ hK>*䴳ٵQQQ;ٸRY_____1 \`0TP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I & F2 _`08TP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I6 _`08TP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF IT^T >YPYTY]]__i` aabcddffulvl3 Y`0P !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I^ `0+ PP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF IvlqquuDyEyW{X{~~'(-."3 Y`0P !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I^"#݉މ;<bc & F@&  & Fp^p & F/ Y`0P !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I3 Y`0P !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I^ &`#$ & F p@ P@&^`P & F p@ P^`P  hKCJhK hK0Jh@Z0JmHnHujhK0JU/ 01h/ =!8"8#$h% #@@@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH P@P Heading 1$ & F @& >*CJaJR@R Heading 2$ & F@&^5CJ\aJH@H Heading 3$ & F@& >*CJaJJ@J Heading 4$ & F@&5CJ\aJZ@Z Heading 5$ & F@&]^5CJ\aJDA@D Default Paragraph FontVi@V  Table Normal :V 44 la (k@(No List XOX Level 17$8$H$^OJQJ_HaJmH sH tH XOX Level 4@ 7$8$H$^@ OJQJ_HaJmH sH tH XOX Level 3p7$8$H$^pOJQJ_HaJmH sH tH XO"X Level 57$8$H$^OJQJ_HaJmH sH tH XC@2X Body Text Indent ^ >*CJaJ6B@B6 Body TextCJaJ4 @R4 Footer  !.)@a. Page NumberXR@rX Body Text Indent 2 & F^CJaJ6U@6 Hyperlink >*B*phXS@X Body Text Indent 3 & F^CJaJB>@B Title$L^La$5CJ\aJFV@F FollowedHyperlink >*B* phZYZ  Document Map-D M CJOJQJ^JaJtN@1t Body Text First Indent 2 hx^h` >*CJaJ@O@ WP9_Title $1$a$5aJh^@h Normal (Web)&ddd[$\$]^CJOJQJaJ*W@* Strong5\6O6 level1!dd[$\$H"H  Balloon Text"CJOJQJ^JaJB]^h./FGn\ $ AB:;#$;<!!!!!B%C%3'4'++..A3B355}7~788-9.9T9U9\:]:::e=f=AALDMDFF G G3G4G]G^GGGGGGG#H$H9H:HKHHHHIIIZI[IrIsIIIIJJ;JtJJJKKQPQTQUUWWiX YYZ[\\^^udvdiimmDqEqWsXsvv'w(wwwww-x.xxx{{"#݁ށ;<bc00000000!0000000000000000000000000000000000000 00 00 00 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 00000000000000000000000@0@00000B]^h./FGn\ $ AB:;#$;<!!!!!B%C%3'4'++..A3B355}7~788-9.9T9U9\:]:::e=f=AALDMDFF G G3G4G]G^GGGGGGG#H$H9H:HKHHHHIIIZI[IrIsIIIIJJ;JtJJJKKQPQTQUUWWiX YYZ[\\^^udvdiimmDqEqWsXsvv'w(wwwww-x.xxx{{"#݁ށ;<bc00000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000 00 00 00 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 000 0000@0@0 00$ $$$'Q FOW n=^OQSU>Yvl"GIJKLMNPQRSTUVH  '!!8@0(  B S  ?|8>>HHzzzz{{{         F R R >>>HHz(zzz{{{   9*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsState8*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsCity=*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceType=*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceName9*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsplace `pJTGMT]gnsyRW]a <B7?@H?I!!" "##G%M%<'F'++u-}-//{22J3T366AA{G~GGGI#IAJKJJJJJ^^jjmmxx{{||z}}+5"ce! * 8859A9C"CG GHIPP^lblqq.xfxgxsxyy~~CO33333333333333333333LLtw LLLLMM02;6[W@_Ceu ,&(5lV $&;k }/>#ң}b\0pMu|vH(>CkQF _7 daP&c!<#Z'Da$\T\q<'kgB*.8*D+Lc5/.֜v 5.Jo9k;/p9*-%<"b(?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXZ[\]^_`bcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~Root Entry F ?AData Y1TableaFWordDocument1SummaryInformation(DocumentSummaryInformation8CompObjq  FMicrosoft Office Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q