ACADEMIC SENATE MINUTES
DATE: February 3, 2005
PRESENT: Alan Davis Mark Hardt
Paul Bauer Audrey ConnerRosberg
Bruce Brumley Connie Landis
Matt Redinger Janie Park (ex-officio)
ABSENT: Lorrie Steerey
Sandie Rietz – excused Keith Edgerton – excused
Mary Susan Fishbaugh – excused Randall Gloege – excused
Noreen Lee – excused Amanda Mears (student)
Emily Valenzuela (student)
Carl Hanson (ex-officio) Tasneem Khaleel (ex-officio)
Joe Michels (ex-officio) George White (ex-officio)
Randy Rhine (ex-officio) John Cech (ex-officio)
Terrie Iverson (ex-officio) Curt Kochner (ex-officio)
GUESTS: Lonnie Schrag Joe Howell
Mick Ender Liz Tooley
PRESIDING: Audrey ConnerRosberg, Vice Chair
Audrey ConnerRosberg called the meeting to order at 3:55 p.m.
in room B36 at the
The Senate agreed to proceed without a quorum (the quorum was met later in the meeting).
The minutes of January 27 were accepted as presented.
I. ITEMS – FOR INFORMATION
Item 55 Teaching Minor in Mathematics. Modification of an existing program.
Joe Howell, Chair of the Math Department, stated that this modification adds the one-credit capstone course required by NCATE and OPI so the major and minor will be parallel.
Þ Motion by Connie Landis, seconded by Mark Hardt to accept Item 55.
Þ Motion carried.
Item 57 AAS in Radiologic Technology. Modification of an existing program.
Item 57.a RAD 182 Clinical Radiology III. New course.
Item 57.b RAD 101 Radiological Technology I. Change course description.
Item 57.c RAD 102 Clinical Radiology I. Change credits and course description.
Item 57.d RAD 104 Principles of Radiographic Exposure. New course.
Item 57.e RAD 151 Radiological Technology II. Change credits and course description.
Item 57.f RAD 181 Radiologic Technology III. New course.
Item 57.g RAD 201 Radiologic Technology IV. New course.
Item 57.h RAD 202 Clinical Radiology IV. New course.
Item 57.i RAD 204 Principles of Radiographic Exposure. Delete course.
Item 57.j RAD 205 Clinical Radiology Intersession. Delete course.
Item 57.k RAD 210 Radiation Physics and Biological Principles II. Delete course.
Item 57.L RAD 251 Radiologic Technology V. New course.
Item 57.m RAD 252 Clinical Radiology V. New course.
Item 57.n RAD 271 Transition to Radiologic Technologist. New course.
Item 57.o RAD 201 Radiological Technology III. Delete course (see Item 57.g).
Item 57.p RAD 202 Clinical Radiology III. Delete course (see Item 57.h).
Item 57.Q RAD 251 Radiological Technology IV. Delete course (see Item 57.L).
Item 57.r RAD 252 Clinical Radiology IV. Delete course (see Item 57.m).
Þ Motion by Mark Hardt, seconded by Connie Landis to accept Items 57, 57.a, 57.b, 57.c, 57.d, 57.e, 57.f, 57.g, 57.h, 57.i, 57.j, 57.k, 57.L, 57.m, 57.n, 57.o, 57.p, 57.Q, and 57.r.
Lonnie Schrag, Team Leader of Nursing, Health, and Safety Occupations, stated that the massive change to the Radiologic Technology program is because the program was initially designed by faculty in the Nursing, Health, and Safety Occupations Center of Excellence before a Radiologic Technology director was hired. This was done because some curriculum had to be prepared for the Board of Regents to approve the new program. Now that a director, Mick Ender, has been hired, he has arranged the curriculum in the most effective and logical way. This program change also adds the prerequisite first semester that the four health programs will now require. Adding this prerequisite semester is a consensus of all the health programs. Mr. Ender noted that staffing is not a problem for the new courses.
Þ Motion carried.
Item 58 AAS in Practical Nursing. Modification of an existing program.
Item 58.a AAS in Paramedic. Modification of an existing program.
Item 58.b HLTH 100 Survey of Health Occupations. New course.
Þ Motion by Bruce Brumley, seconded by Mark Hardt to accept Items 58, 58.a, and 58.b.
Mr. Schrag noted that these two program changes incorporate the prerequisite semester into the remaining health programs (Medical Assisting was approved in December). Item 58.b is the new, one-credit course which all health students will take, so they can make an informed decision about which program they want to enter. There new course requires no additional staff, as it will be taught by the four program directors.
Þ Motion carried.
Item 56.d BA Major in Sociology. Modification of an existing program.
Item 56.e BS Major in Sociology. Modification of an existing program.
Item 56.f Minor in Political Science. Modification of an existing program.
Item 56.g SOCL 301 Social Organization. Delete course.
Þ Motion by Connie Landis, seconded by Matt Redinger to table Items 56.d, 56.e, 56.f, and 56.g until next week so someone can explain the changes.
Item 34 EC 597 Professional Seminar in Early Childhood. Change title and course description.
Item 34.a RD 597
Professional Seminar in
Þ Motion by Connie Landis, seconded by Mark Hardt to table Items 34 and 34.a until next week so someone can explain the changes.
II. DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS
A. Establishing a Certificate within an Existing Program: Senate Process
Alan Davis noted that the Senate has no good process for creating a certificate. His department is interested in offering online certificates for people who may not want a graduate degree, but need some kind of additional training. Janie Park, Provost, noted that the Board of Regents currently requires their approval on a certificate of 30 credits or more, but they are looking at changing the limit of credits. In the past, a certificate had to
be 30 credits in order to be called a certificate, but the BOR is probably going to change
that rule because there is an increased need for certificates with fewer credits. However, this rule change will take at least another meeting or two of the BOR, so it won’t be until much later this year.
Alan Davis agreed to work with Ms. Rabe Meduna on a form for new certificates.
B. Revisit Three Changes Rule: Forms
It was noted that some course changes may only have one change to the course description, but that is a very significant change, enough to make it a new course. It was cited that the UCC can certainly make a judgement call, as they have this year, to approve a course with more than three changes.
It was observed that if the three changes rule were eliminated, the onus would be on the faculty proposing the change to convince the various committees that what they are doing is necessary. It was further noted that we are running out of numbers. Deleting courses and making new ones will eventually leave us with no unused course numbers.
It was cited that the more we try to define what a new course is, the more difficult the course-change process will become. It should be left up to the Departments as to whether it is a new course.
Þ Motion by Matt Redinger, seconded by Mark Hardt to remove the “three changes rule” from the course change form, and substitute a spot where faculty can indicate there has been discussion about the course being considered a new course.
Þ Motion carried.
The Senate will ask Chair Edgerton to notify the faculty of the change when he returns.
C. Graduate Studies Director
It was noted that is truly unfair to Dean George White, serving as both a dean and the Director of Graduate Studies. Perhaps the position of Director could rotate among the Deans.
Dr. Park indicated that her wish is to have a dedicated Director who serves no other college, but as always, there is not funding for such a position. A Dean does have a conflict of interest, but it is the best we can do with the funding we have.
It was noted that perhaps this issue should be discussed
with President Gamble the next time he visits.
It was countered that the Academic Senate is not really concerned with
budget issues, and if there was funding given for a Director it would come out
of Gamble’s budget. He also has a
conflict of interest because he must advocate for MSU-Bozeman, but also for the
smaller campuses under
D. Campus Smoking Policy
It was cited that a year or two ago, there was a proposal to limit smoking to certain areas around campus. Has that ever been enforced?
Dr. Park noted that (1) we are a state institution, so we cannot legally be a smoke-free campus and (2) we have designated smoke free zones of 30 feet around each entrance. However, the issue is: who will enforce this zone? Who is going to go around writing tickets for people who are 20 feet from the door instead of 30 feet?
The meeting adjourned at 4:55 p.m.