Academic Senate Youngstown State University Youngstown, Ohio  44555

Note 1: Please submit agenda items and cover sheets for the March 6, 2002, Senate meeting to Bege Bowers, A&S Dean's Office, by noon on Friday, February 22. Provide both a hard copy and a disk or electronic copy of your report and cover sheet in Word or rich text format. A downloadable cover sheet is available at the Academic Senate web site:

Note 2: If you want to read or print the pdf version of these minutes and don’t have Adobe Acrobat Reader, you may download the program at the following link: <http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html>.

To save paper, use the Acrobat Reader menus or toolbar to print the file, not the menus or toolbar in your web browser. 

Major topics presented/discussed: Report of the Senate chair; revised annual elections report; establishment of the Underground Railroad as a theme for general education next year; ways of improving celebratory academic events such as commencement and the honors convocation; Provost's address on Metro College "reform" and the reinstitution of academic program review.

Jim Morrison, chair of the Academic Senate, called the meeting to order at 4:08 p.m.

Minutes of the Previous Meeting:

Minutes of the 5 December 2001 meeting were approved as posted.

To view the December minutes, click here; click your “Back” button as necessary to return to the February minutes.

Senate Executive Committee (SEC) / Report from the Chair: Jim Morrison reported that the SEC has met to discuss several items. He made the following announcements:

• Bege Bowers has agreed to continue serving as secretary, at least temporarily, under the following conditions: The minutes will include only specific actions taken and reports submitted to the secretary in electronic form. Meetings will also continue to be taped (although the taping process sometimes fails), and the tapes will be saved as a matter of record. When you speak, please identify yourself for purposes of the record. Tapes may (or may not) be transcribed at a later date.

• Provost Atwater met with the SEC to discuss several items, two of which will be presented during his address later in the meeting.

• Concerns have been raised about two items: health and safety issues, and academic grievances. Morrison has asked Tom Shipka to study the Senate Bylaws and make recommendations about possible changes in the language concerning academic grievances. These suggestions would go to the Charter and Bylaws Committee, which would consider them and decide whether to bring the Senate recommendations for changes.

• The ad hoc Committee on Ethics has been meeting and may bring recommendations to be discussed at the March Senate meeting.

Morrison asked for, and was granted, unanimous consent to reorder the agenda and place the Provost's address near the end of the agenda, following the committee reports.

Ohio Faculty Council (OFC): Jim Morrison noted that there is no Ohio Faculty Council report for the February Senate meeting; the council meets February 15. Drs. Morrison and Shipka will ask the OFC to address once again the possibility of tuition-remission reciprocity agreements for children of faculty and staff at various state institutions of higher education.

Charter and Bylaws Committee: No report.

Elections and Balloting Committee: Louise Aurilio, chair of the committee, did not report at the meeting but submitted the attached revised annual report showing the results of Senate elections for 2001-2002. See Attachment 1: Revised Senate Elections and Balloting Committee Report: 2001-2002.

Academic Standards Committee; Academic Programs Committee: No reports.  

University Curriculum Committee: No additional report. The report appeared in Attachment 1 to the agenda for the February 6 Senate meeting and requires no action.

Academic Planning Committee: No report. 

General Education Committee (GEC):  Bill Jenkins, chair of the committee, reported:

The General Education Committee has decided to establish a theme for next year's general education program: the Underground Railroad. With the recent designation of YSU as a Freedom Station by the National Underground Railroad Freedom Center in Cincinnati, it is appropriate that the University focus on this subject because of its commitment to diversity. The purpose is to enable students to experience the development of this topic in a variety of ways. The theme approach will provide an interdisciplinary experience that allows students to see how different disciplines approach a common theme. Numerous activities could be undertaken: partial coverage in the classroom, courses dedicated to the topic, plays, artwork, speakers, faculty forums, assignment of a common book. The possibilities are endless and much dependent on faculty support and ingenuity. Thus, the GEC is soliciting ideas that can be implemented during the upcoming academic year. Please call Bill Jenkins at ext. 2983 if you are interested in participating. 

In addition, a list of newly certified "intensive" and capstone courses appeared in Attachment 2 to the agenda for the February 6 Senate meeting. A list of all certified general education courses appears on the General Education web site at http://www.ysu.edu/ger/.

Integrated Technologies Committee, University Outreach Committee; Library Committee; Academic Research Committee, Student Academic Affairs Committee, Student Academic Grievance Committee, and Honors Committee:  No reports.

Academic Events Committee:  Lowell Satre, chair of the committee, gave the following report: 

Fall semester, the committee helped arrange for and encourage faculty involvement in the President’s installation. In addition, Jim Morrison has asked the committee to explore how commencement and the honors convocation can be more meaningful, effective, and inviting for students, faculty, administrators, and families. The committee has solicited ideas from elsewhere in the University community: from Dean McCloud, Student Government, and others.

Among ideas the committee has received to improve commencement are these:

• provide more effective reading of names of those graduating

• use a college banner to recognize each college

• consider ways to gain greater participation on the part of students, faculty, and administrators.

Ideas for improving honors convocation are these:

• facilitate the presenting of the awards (it has taken too long in the past)

• determine what students are present (names are read and too often no one comes forward)

• reduce time for class honors (ask students to stand and be recognized)

• shorten the awarding of distinguished professorships or move it to another event

• consider holding the convocation at Stambaugh, which has more seating and is more “festive”

• explore how to get students and recipients to remain for the entire ceremony

Satre can be reached in the History Department or by e-mail at ljsatre@www.ysu.edu. Send him ideas.

Provost's Address:  Provost Atwater gave remarks and welcomes comments about two matters: Metro College “reform” and the reinstitution of academic program review:

Metro College “reform”: YSU has an important investment in continuing education, noncredit course offerings, work-force education, contract education, distributed education, etc. The Metro College has played and can continue to play a significant role in these types of education. 

However, the Metro College (MC) was apparently initiated in way that didn’t involve significant faculty involvement. The MC is not as well connected to curriculum as it might be and doesn’t bear the “signature” of faculty. The issue I want to pose is this: “What would a unit called Extended Studies be if it were built from the ground up by the faculty?” The purpose of coming before you is to begin conversation about how we can reconstitute the MC to be a product of the faculty. Perhaps the MC could be renamed. The mission of continuing education and extended studies is what’s important. There is much opportunity, and much is at stake.

I’m proposing to work with appropriate Senate committees to develop a “reformed” unit with a faculty imprint on it. It might be a school of continuing education or extended studies. It might serve the role of coordinating the types of education mentioned earlier and linking them with faculty needs.

If the MC drains students from the main campus, we need to address that concern. The role of extended studies should be to take University resources to other populations that might not have access to courses on the main campus. This raises issues of distance education and distributed education.

The unit doesn’t necessarily have to be off campus. It would be a facilitating unit, not offering its own degree programs but working closely with colleges and departments on campus to provide stronger support in continuing education, workforce education, noncredit courses, etc.

However we reform or revise the MC, it’s urgent that we do so with the signature of faculty on that unit. I will work with appropriate Senate committees to get the ball rolling. If you feel my ideas are correct, let me know. If you feel they’re off the mark, let me know that as well.

Reinstitution of academic program review: The conversion to semesters took considerable work, and program review was put on hold during that process. Now we have to think about where we want to go with academic program review. YSU takes a lot of pride in the quality of its academic programs. The Provost’s Office is interested in maintaining that quality. 

I have met with members of the Senate Executive Committee to get their thoughts; I want to work with appropriate Senate committees to get a process that’s a “fit” for YSU. Academic program review as I see it is a method of performing periodic checkups to see that programs are functioning as they should; it’s also a way of supporting and enhancing programs, not punishing programs.  Program review could be a vehicle for downsizing or taking away funding--my view is the “flip” side of that. In a periodic checkup on a 3- or 5-year cycle, you notice things: a department has lost requisite FTE faculty, needs more or upgraded labs or equipment, etc. Handled well, program review can be an asset. 

I will work with the Senate on questions such as the following: What form should program review take? When should we reinstitute it? Which departments or programs would go first? My inclination is to look at departments as a unit for program review--though there could be other units of analysis: individual programs or a particular college. Some faculty say accreditation does what program review does, so why does an accredited program need program review? Professional accreditation has a role to play, but comprehensive academic program review may get into areas that professional accreditation doesn’t tap or de-emphasizes. Program review helps programs develop a better sense of direction. 

Program review is a form of continuous quality improvement and makes sense in terms of how we link scare resources to academic program resources. I welcome your input on both of the topics I’ve addressed.

Jim Morrison asked for comments and questions; there were none.

Unfinished business:  None.

New business:  None. 

Adjournment:  The meeting adjourned at 4:45 p.m.