Faculty Senate University Curriculum Committee February 18, 2010 ...

Faculty Senate University Curriculum Committee
February 18, 2010
3:30 PM
MAR 128
A regular meeting of the Faculty Senate University Curriculum Committee was convened at 3:30 p.m. on
February 18, 2009 with Chair Stefan Cairns presiding.
Members Present: Stefan Cairns (Chair), Ashley Guyer, Yue Cai-Hillon, Nancy Forth, Sandra Merrill,
Clint Orr, Jay Raveill, Dan Schierenbeck, Jim Taylor, Joy Stevenson, Teri Bowman, Doug Couch, and
Chris Wright.
Absent: Leigh Ann Blunt, Lori Cochran, Michael Grelle, and the student representative.
Guests: Odin Jurkowski (for Lori Cochran), Dick Kahoe, Scott Wilson, and John Sutton.
I. Minutes
The minutes for the September 17, 2009 meeting were unanimously accepted. Dan Schierenbeck
volunteered to take minutes for the current meeting.
Leigh Ann Blunt was unable to attend, but she provided proxy votes and comments on the
physics program proposal, which Stefan distributed.
II.
New/ Revised Program
A. Technology Education Program Revision (Name Change): Dick Kahoe and John Sutton
John Sutton explained that the name change to “Engineering & Technology Teacher Education”
reflects better the DESE language as well as School of Technology name changes . He also
noted the examples provided of the DESE webpage as well as education webpages from other
states. The name change also includes the deletion of the “Technical Courses” subheading to
reduce complication in the catalog listing.
Stefan noted that this name change went to APC at the same time because of time constraints.
Chris Wright mentioned that this program may want to include supply-chain management courses
in the future, and Keshav Bhattarai requested similar consideration for GIS courses.
Nancy Forth moved to approve the program revisions, and Chris Wright seconded the motion.
Keshav Bhattarai wondered about similarly named courses in equivalent university programs that
were not found on the included webpages. Dick Kahoe noted that all the webpages included with
the program revision request were equivalents of DESSE rather than university programs.
The motion passed unanimously.
B. Technology 2 + 2 Program Name Change: Stefan Cairns and Scott Wilson
This program had been around and in the catalog for ten years, but the documentation had never
reached CBHE. This name change was then sent forward, but the CBHE had a problem with 2 +
2 programs being tied to particular community colleges. The resulting program name change thus
reflects a clean-up effort to comply with CBHE, but the meat of the program has not changed.
1

Chris Wright requested that in the future they may want to consider some business courses. Jim
Taylor wanted to make sure that the prefixes matched the catalog copy, and Scott Wilson noted
that the proposed contents of the catalog after the name change have the correct course prefixes
(ENGT instead of MMGT).
Clint Orr moved to approve the name change, and Chris Wright seconded the motion. No further
discussion ensued, and the motion passed unanimously.
C. Physics Program Abeyance: Stefan Cairns
Stefan Cairns noted that provost’s office had initiated abeyance for these programs rather than
deletion. He also wanted to bring up the question of procedure since the only undergraduate
program the FSUCC had placed in abeyance was the Liberal Studies program, which had not
gone through the proper development curriculum process. Sandra mentioned MS in Modern
Languages and Stefan added MS in Agriculture as other programs not going through a process
for deletion or abeyance. Stefan pointed out there was no process for abeyance.
Jim Taylor presented issues with both the procedure and the findings of the APC and its
subcommittee. He was concerned that the subcommittee proceeded with only one member rather
than three. He also noted that the New York Times article that was cited was not included in the
forwarded materials. Jim Taylor also cited statistics to challenge the findings that there was a
waning interest in physics in high schools. He conceded that these programs have a small
number of graduates but also contended that since many of these courses are shared by other
programs that these deletions would not save substantially on personnel resources (only about
half a person). Finally, he also mentioned the 5 million in STEM grants to increase physics.
Keshave Bhattarai wondered about what would happen to the 2.7 million for physics scholarships
if these programs were deleted, and Jim Taylor thought the money would have to be sent back to
the donor. Keshav Bhattarai and Joy Stevenson were worried about the negative impact that the
proposed abeyance would have on international students.
Chris Wright questioned Jim Taylor about department goals for enrollment and what their breakeven
point would be especially considering the implementation of the aforementioned physics
scholarships. Dan Schierenbeck noted that it was difficult to make a decision on this program
because of the lack of information forwarded to the committee. Chris Wright agreed that if
programs are put in abeyance there should be a record of initiation and documentation on every
level to support or reject the decisions for abeyance. Clint Orr also remarked that he was
concerned by the lack of documentation. Chris Wright stressed the need for the a common and
consistent means of evaluating programs .
Following this discussion two motions were approved by the committee:
Chris Wright moved and Jim Taylor seconded the following motion, which passed 9-1:
The Faculty Senate Curriculum Committee is not in favor of abeyance/deletion due to lack of
documentation.
Chris Wright and moved and Jim Taylor seconded the following motion, which passed
unanimously:
The Faculty Senate Curriculum Committee requests that the APC, SPRC, and the Provost
develop/follow a consistent and transparent method of evaluation programs.
III.
Information/Discussion Items
A. Individualized Major and Minor
2

Since Michael Grelle was absent, Stefan postponed this item, noting that this item was still “on
the burner.”
B. Curriculum Forms
Stefan advised members to encourage their colleges to be patient with the forms and process. He
noted that new web process looks good on paper and hopes to have the committee test it by the
end of March.
IV.
The meeting adjourned at 5:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dan Schierenbeck
3