ACADEMIC SENATE MINUTES
DATE: October 29, 2009
PRESENT: Dan Yazak Jeff Sanders
Don Larsen Sandie Rietz
Paul Bauer Rakesh Sah
Lorrie Steerey Craig McKenzie
Keith Edgerton Doug Brown
Bruce Brumley Steve Coffman
Diane Duin (ex-officio) Tasneem Khaleel (ex-officio)
Gary Young (ex-officio) Mary Susan Fishbaugh (ex-officio)
Sue Balter-Reitz (ex-officio) D’Ann Campbell (ex-officio)
ABSENT: Mark Hardt*
John Cech (ex-officio)* Karen Heikel (ex-officio)*
Terrie Iverson (ex-officio) Stacy Klippenstein (ex-officio)
GUESTS: Tami Miller Cindy Rossmith
PRESIDING: Lorrie Steerey, Chair
Lorrie Steerey called the meeting to order at 3:44 p.m. in the COT Health Science Building North Conference room.
The minutes of October 8 were accepted with modifications.
I. ITEMS – FOR INFORMATION
Item 9 FREN 301, 302 Advanced French Conversation I, II. Delete courses.
Item 9.a FREN 311, 312 French Civilization I, II. Delete courses.
Item 9.b FREN 401, 402 Survey of French Literature I, II. Delete courses.
̃ Motion by Bruce Brumley, seconded by Steve Coffman to accept Items 9 through 9.b for information.
̃ Motion carried.
Item 12 BFA (Bachelor of Fine Arts) in Art. New program.
̃ Motion by Sandie Rietz, seconded by Craig McKenzie to approve Item 12.
It was noted that this new degree has already been approved by the Board of Regents before it was reviewed by the UCC and Senate.
It was cited that this is the sixth or seventh time this has happened since 2000, that a program was sent to the BOR without Senate knowledge. The Senate ends up agreeing with something after the fact. Every time the Senate has been polite and asked for apologies and promises that it won’t happen again. It was cited that the Senate has tabled items, including the AAS in Power Plant Technology and the Minor in Health Communication. The AAS was pulled from the BOR agenda until the Senate could resolve the budget issues for the program. The Minor is still tabled because the interdisciplinary faculty cannot seem to agree on it.
̃ Motion by Steve Coffman, seconded by Sandie Rietz to table Item 12 until the Senate has had time to review the proposal.
̃ Motion carried with one against and one abstention.
II. DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS
A. Procedure for New Program Approval
Provost Campbell noted that at a Provost Council meeting in November, 2005, the Council discussed a procedure for campus and BOR approval. Since new programs can only be proposed to the BOR twice a year, we must get in the process when we can. We also don’t want faculty to do all the meticulous work of creating the curriculum and outcomes, only to have the BOR deny the program or give it to another unit (which has happened, e.g., the speech therapy proposal). It was agreed at the 2005 Provost Council meeting that since the BOR only give us authorization to offer a program, we should get that first, using a very rough draft of a program.
Provost Campbell also noted that the Art accrediting body has taken issue with our BA in Art Studio option, since those students do the work to earn a BFA but are not being awarded one. The program has not been proposed until now because of the administration’s fear that the BOR will deny the request because of duplication with other units. Patricia Vettel-Becker, Chair of Art, began working on this project in January, 2009, and Dr. Campbell took it to Cabinet in July. Unfortunately, Dr. Steerey was on vacation that week and did not attend that Cabinet meeting. Dr. Campbell and Dr. Vettel-Becker spoke with Bozeman and Missoula and got their full support for MSUB offering a BFA.
The question was raised: does the Senate want to embarrass the University and the Chancellor and ask the BOR to pull the BFA proposal and approval? It was stated the Senate would never want that situation to come about. It was noted that the real issue is, we must form a procedure that works for both the campus and the BOR so this does not happen again. The Senate had agreed in 2008 that the campus process would come before a program was submitted for BOR approval.
Dr. Edgerton noted that he was Senate Chair in November, 2005, and was present at the Provost Council meeting Dr. Campbell mentioned. He noted that at that time, the BOR began a process to form lists for each campus. Any new program that we might want to propose in the next several years has to be on this list (which is out on the web at http://mus.edu/asa/academicplans/Billings.pdf). He, as Senate Chair, agreed to this list policy, and perhaps all this confusion stems from that decision.
It was cited that it makes sense to get approval of a program idea from the BOR first, before fully developing it at the campus level. It was noted that when a situation arises where a program has been approved by the BOR and then comes to the Senate being very expensive, the Senate looks bad when we don’t approve it.
Dr. Steerey noted that she and several Senators met with the Chancellor on Tuesday of this week. Dr. Sexton stated that the BFA proposal did not follow the campus procedure.
It was stated that we have control over the campus process, but we have no control over what the BOR will do. We should be able to do both processes at the same time. It was cited that the BOR is really a “game” of timing: getting in that six month window but also getting Senate approval first. The issue comes when the BOR approve first and the Senate becomes nothing but a rubber stamp. It was suggested that before a Level I or II proposal is submitted to the BOR, it will come to the Senate first, even if it requires a summer meeting. If the administration takes a program to the BOR without the Senate seeing it, the Senate will ask the BOR to pull it from the agenda. This process will be discussed at the next meeting.
The Senate agreed to meet next week (November 5).
B. Revenue from Excess Tuition
Dr. Steerey stated that the Chancellor has said MSUB will have an excess of about $200,000 from tuition. She suggested the funds be used for:
· Professional development for faculty
· Department budgets which are running low on basic funds
Any other suggestions, please send them to Dr. Steerey before the next Chancellor’s Budget meeting November 5. Other suggestions included:
· Distribute the funds to the faculty (salary)
· Fix the air conditioning at the College of Business
It was noted that the Foundation actually owns the COB building, but Dr. Steerey will carry that request to the Foundation.
The meeting adjourned at 5:00 p.m.