Wednesday, October 02, 2019

Council in Attendance:
Ahmed Al-Kaisy (Engineering)
Christopher Livingston (Architecture)
Wade Hill (Nursing)
Brock Smith (Agriculture)
Dennis Aig (Arts)
Sobia Anjum (Student Representative)
Lisa Davis (Letters & Science)
Tena Versland (Education)
James Becker (Health & Human Development)
Michael Brody (Faculty Senate)
Robert Rydell (Letters & Science)
Craig Ogilvie (Dean of The Graduate School)
Hannah McKelvey (Library)

Also in Attendance:
Lauren Cerretti (Graduate School)
Emily Peters (Graduate School)

Sara Mannheimer (Library)
Marc Giullian (Business)
Que Vo (International Programs)

Meeting started at 1:00 pm

Approval of September 18, 2019 Minutes

Motion to approve made by Versland, 2nd by Rydell, unanimously passed


Faculty Senate Update (Brody):

  • Discussion on interdisciplinary courses and how they will be treated in the CiM system in the future
    • Currently a checkbox for interdisciplinary that creates an extended approval menu; recommend a separate box to complete about other departments—approval menu will probably not change, so it will be up to proposer to do that work
  • Courses that are proposed to be taught by adjunct or NTT faculty have been raised as an issue—something to keep in mind for UGC

Old Business

MS of Innovation & Management(Aig/Livingston)

  • Dean Ranalli will be formally removing the proposal from UGC’s consideration
    • Missed timing for 2020 launch—plan to revise and resubmit for consideration later this fall


Integrated MS in Optics & Photonics (Aig/Livingston): copies of email communication regarding UGC’s feedback and proposer’s responses were handed out to the committee

  • Proposer is willing to address most comments; however, there is concern with other programs on campus used as examples that are already doing this (Computer Science and MIE)
    • Dean Ogilvie will be talking to these programs in the near future; some policies like 9 credits of 4xx seem they should not have exceptions
    • Some programs use 4xx level courses as electives, it could be difficult to get enough credits without these electives
  • Responses don’t explain why policy exceptions are being requested
    • In the history of grad school there have been many exceptions, doesn’t mean it applies to everyone—a previous exception is not a valid explanation for a new exception; there should be a strong reason why a program does not meet policy
  • Main concern is double counting credits
    • Q: Is the council okay with this type of proposal – double counting credits going forward?
      • Open discussion on double counting credits
      • General consensus that the council is concerned with double counting. Is it really necessary?
  • Proposer addresses most concerns except double counting – we can express our concern – other than this issue is there any other outstanding issue?
    • Would like clarification from the registrar’s office – is there a mechanism to remove reserved status?
    • Should the course listings copied from the catalog be included in the CIM proposal?
      • Yes, that would be helpful, course listings could be added as appendix; understanding that newer courses may not exist yet
    • Q: Does council support the reserved credits?
      • Discussion on reserved credits policy
      • Suggestion: council could choose to be more flexible on reserved policy but remain strict on the policy of no more than 9 cr at 4xx level
  • Livingston will email Randy Babbitt: ask for all the other changes to be made in CIM and then invite to attend UGC’s next meeting for a conversation about the justification for double counting

New Business

PhD in Public Policy & Administration (Livingston): Copies of email communication regarding initial feedback and proposer’s responses were handout out to the committee

  • Strong proposal and very thoughtful
  • Discussion on 27 versus 30 considered credits – some programs count only coursework credits; example: 21 for Engineering
  • Several new courses in the proposal seem they will be taught elsewhere on our campus (e.g. Qualitative Analysis, Quantitative Analysis, College Teaching). Should there be collaboration on these courses? Has this been discussed before?
    • Probably not in many years; problem in the past was workload/resources
    • They requested additional faculty lines, but an option to reduce the resource need for this program could be course sharing
  • Milestones of their courses: submitting their PhD program of study before they are assembling their committee seems to be out of order
  • Proposers are open to having someone attend meeting if requested; we can also pass it on with any concerns
    • Address credits (30, 12 additional), explore course sharing
      • Would like to hear from proposers why these new courses would need to be different than existing courses
    • Having faculty from different disciplines serve as chairs can be confusing – different requirements for things like exams
      • Q: Should we suggest co-chair language?
      • A: Think it’s up to the department, but would like them to think about the implications
  • Livingston will email our concerns and invite Elizabeth Shanahan to our next meeting


Adjourned at 2:01 pm

Next scheduled meeting – October 16, 2019 Reid 415