FACULTY SENATE MINUTES #14
��������������� �����
1. CALL TO ORDER: The fourteenth meeting of the Faculty Senate for 2007-2008 was called
to order
at
Alwes.
SENATORS
AND MEMBERS PRESENT:
K. Ales, B. Buxton,
K.
Lawrence, N. Helsper, H. Botwinick, D. West, J. Reese, J. Walkuski, J.
Governali, J. Hendrick, A. Dahlman,
D.
Harrington, T. Vigars, D. Ritchie, T. Slack, M. Ware, S. Snell, J. Clark, C.
Hahl, J. Riddock, E. Bitterbaum,
R.
Peagler, D. West, J. Walkuski,
SENATORS AND MEMBERS ABSENT: J Shedd, D. Miller, O.
White, J. Rayle, J. Duncan, B. Langhans,
D. Videto, B. Schecter, E. Davis-Russell, R. Franco, W. Shaut, J. Ford,
M. Connell
GUESTS PRESENT: �P. Koryzno, R. Kendrick, M. Canfield
II. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES:
The
minutes from
III. SENATE ACTIONS:
There was a vote to conduct an emergency Faculty Senate meeting on May
13, 2008 to discuss and vote on� the
General Education Assessment Plan (Approved)
IV. CHAIR�S REPORT:
Chair
Alwes had no report.
V. VICE CHAIR'S REPORT
B. Buxton � No report.
VI. SECRETARY�S REPORT:
E. McCabe - no report.
VII. TREASURER�S REPORT:
D. Berger
� The Treasurer reported that there was approximately $1181.68 in the Senate
Treasury.� He announced
the possibility of awarding two Faculty Senate scholarships next year.
VIII. PRESIDENT�S REPORT:
President
Bitterbaum gave a brief report regarding the budget situation.
IX. STANDING COMMITTEE REPORTS:
Educational
Policy Committee �
R. Kendrick, Chair � D. West reported that she had no report due to the
cancellation of a scheduled meeting.
Student Affairs Committee � M. Connell, Chair � No report (absent)
Faculty Affairs Committee � J. Walkuski, Chair � No report.
College Research Committee � No report.
General
Education Committee �
M. McGuire, Chair � The GE Committee Plan was distributed but not
acted on
due to the report not being distributed beforehand.� After discussion it was decided to hold an
emergency
Faculty
Senate meeting on
X. OTHER COMMITTEE REPORTS:
Committee
on Committees
-� J. Barry, Chair � E. McCabe, Faculty
Senate Secretary, read the committee
nominations,
which were approved, and results of the Senate elections {SEE Appendix 2)
XI.
AREA SENATOR�S REPORTS:
T. Slack
followed up on his report on April 22 regarding the 3% in energy savings,
explaining that compared
to the desired
goal of 80% energy reduction, the campus would meet its goal in 2050 at the
present rate and he
commended
everyone on campus for their efforts..
J.
Walkuski recognized R. Peagler for his efforts as Interim Vice President for
Student Affairs which was met
with a
hearty round of applause.
XII.
SUNY SENATOR�S REPORT � M. Ware � SUNY Senator Ware had no report but referred
to the
e-mail
from R. Moulton urging SUNY Cortland faculty to apply to serve on SUNY Faculty
Senate
committees and encouraged anyone interested or having questions to contact her.
XIII. STUDENT SENATOR�S REPORTS:
The students gave a brief report.
XIV.
OLD BUSINESS:
The GE
Assessment Plan was distributed but not acted on due to the report not being
made available beforehand.�
After
discussion it was decided to hold a brief emergency Faculty Senate meeting on
May 13 to debate and
vote on
it.
The Review
of Governance business regarding discussion of formation of an ad hoc committee
on the proposed
Professional
Affairs Committee was addressed. There was a discussion to determine whether
the Senate
was in
favor of forming an ad hoc committee for the Professional Affairs Committee to
conduct its work over
the
summer. Although it was determined that the Senate was in favor of formation of
such a committee, after
consideration
it was decided that it was not feasible to conduct such an effort at this time
due to several factors
including
an insufficient time period to conduct elections. It was decided that the topic
would be discussed in the
Fall.� A
straw vote was conducted in favor of the proposed Professional Affairs
Committee, as outlined in the
Review of Governance Report, Part II, Committee Structure, which was
approved.
The agenda
item regarding a new Senate meeting time was not undertaken. It was decided to
take up that business
in the Fall.
XV.
NEW BUSINESS:
The Chair announced that the CTE and Faculty Affairs Committee will be
charged in Fall 2008 with looking into
issues such as ownership, usage and privacy issues online; evaluation of
online courses and the process regarding
Course Teacher Evaluations at SUNY
Respectfully Submitted:
Barbara Kissel
Recording Secretary
The
following reports are appended to the minutes in the order they are submitted:
(1) General Education
Assessment Plan 2008/09 � 2010/11 Draft
����������� Chair, GE Committee
(2) Committee on Committees
report submitted by J. Barry, Chair
(3) Professional Affairs
Committee Report submitted by H. Botwinick
(4) TE Committee�s Role in
Online Course Evaluation from the CTE Committee
M. McGuire,
Chair, GE Committee --
DRAFT
�����������������������
�������������
INTRODUCTION AND
BACKGROUND INFORMATION��...���..������.3
CHANGES TO ORIGINAL CAMPUS-BASED GENERAL EDUCATION
����� ASSESSMENT PLAN FOR
2008/2009 - 2010/2011.............................................................. 3
A. Timetable....................................................................................................................... 4
B. Course Samples........................................................................................................... 5
C. Implementation Procedures........................................................................................ 6
D. Validity and Reliability Indices..................................................................................... 6
E.�
Assessment Instruments............................................................................................. 7
Appendices
Starting in 2002/03,
In Fall 2007, SUNY Cortland proposed to the chair of the SUNY
GE Committee to modify the Spring 2008 General Education assessment in 5 areas:
����������� GE
4 �
����������������������� GE
8 � The Arts
����������������������� GE
9 � Foreign Language
GE 10b. Basic Writing: Presentation
Skills
GE Competency: Information Management
The changes to the assessment instruments and rubrics aimed
to accomplish two goals:� 1) increase the
validity of results, using the knowledge gained from the previous assessments
in the GE categories; and 2) coordinate with the new GE Program introduced at
SUNY Cortland in Fall 2007, which combines the SUNY and Cortland General
Education programs.
CHANGES TO ORIGINAL CAMPUS-BASED GENERAL EDUCATION
���� ASSESSMENT
PLAN 2008/09 - 2010/11
To increase the validity of General Education Assessment
during the 2007-08 academic year (and the third year of our current 3-year
cycle of GE Assessment), SUNY Cortland is modifying some of the assessment
instruments and rubrics.� Our 2005-2008 General
Education Assessment Plan, approved by SUNY System, identified �essays or TBD �
To Be Determined� for the Assessment Instrument, and �
The 2008/09 � 2010/2011
cycle of GE assessment at SUNY Cortland is built on the strengths of past GE
assessment processes, as identified through the results of the ongoing
assessment in GE categories and through self-assessment of our methodology for
GE assessment.� The modified assessment
process for the new three-year cycle is described below.�
The order in which categories will be assessed in the proposed three-year cycle (Table 1) has been changed slightly from the previous cycle to encourage ongoing refinement of assessment instruments, particularly in some categories.� This procedure will also again be assessed in three years.� For example, GE 1 has not been assessed for more than five years due to the search for a satisfactory standardized instrument across SUNY schools.� It is now planned that mathematics, or �Quantitative Skills� here at SUNY Cortland, will be assessed in 2008/09.� Specifically, ad hoc faculty groups, the GE Committee and IRA are considering alternative measurement options and curricular issues.
Table 1.� Proposed GE Assessment
Schedule
Proposed Assessment Date |
General Education Category |
Last Assessment Date |
|
|
|
2008/09� (Spring (Administration) |
GE 1
Quantitative Skills |
2002/03 |
|
GE 2� Natural Sciences |
2005/06 |
|
GE 3� Social Sciences |
2005/06 |
|
GE 5� Western Civilization |
2005/06 |
|
GE 6� Contrasting Cultures |
2005/06 |
|
|
|
2009/10� (Spring) |
GE 4� |
2007/08 |
|
GE 7�� Humanities |
2005/06 |
|
GE 10
Basic Communication: ���������� Writing |
2006/07 |
|
GE
Competency Area: Critical ��������� Thinking |
2006/07 |
|
|
|
2010/11� (Spring) |
GE� 8�
The Arts |
2007/08 |
|
GE� 9��
Foreign Language |
2007/08 |
|
GE 10
Basic Communication: ���������� Presentation Skills |
2007/08 |
|
GE
Competency Area: ���������� Information Management |
2007/08 |
Although standardized essay questions and rubrics have been a
staple in the Cortland GE Assessment Program to date, the results of previous
GE assessment tasks indicated that faculty groups for each GE category are
likely to be able to improve upon the instruments and rubrics.� The changes this year are likely to include
the use of multiple assessment tasks (non-standardized) that are
course-embedded and already in use by instructors.� Essays in some GE categories will be replaced
by more performance measures that are more valid and appropriate for the area,
e.g., portfolios for assessment in GE 8 � The Arts and oral presentations for
assessment in GE 10b. � Basic Communication: Presentation Skills.
The office of Institutional Research and Assessment (IRA) will
assist in organizing the development of new assessment tools.� IRA will continue to provide support for the
collection, collation, and analysis of the results and be responsible for
submitting the GE Summary Reports to SUNY by
At SUNY Cortland, the General Education Committee is comprised of faculty representation for each sub-division of the College and serves as a standing committee of the Faculty Senate. The GE Committee reviews, endorses and approves the GE assessment procedures for the College to assure best practices exist. The Committee meets bi-weekly and relies on the administrative structure and responsibilities of the office of IRA in carrying out all tasks of the Committee. Such tasks include, but are not restricted to sampling procedures, implementation of assessment procedures, analysis of results, and assessment reporting. The office of Institutional Research and Assessment conducts all General Education assessment tasks with the approval and support of the GE Committee. The success and viability of the GE Assessment Plan at SUNY Cortland is dependent on the cooperation and coordination between the entire College faculty, GE Committee, and office of Institutional Research and Assessment.
The office of Institutional Research and Assessment (IRA) will be responsible for analyzing the results of the assessment and for reporting the results to SUNY System in the Annual Summary Reports.� At all stages of dissemination, data will be treated in aggregate form and anonymity of students, faculty members, and courses will be maintained.
Appendix I:�
|
||||||
Reporting Category |
Not
Meeting Standard |
Approaching
Standard |
Meeting
Standard |
Exceeding
Standard |
||
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
Standard |
Provides minimal or no evidence of understanding; makes no
connections between Goals, Assumptions, & Objectives of the GE Category;
and makes unclear or unwarranted connections to the assigned task. |
Conveys a confused or inaccurate understanding of the
course material; alludes to the Goals, Assumptions, & Objectives of the
GE Category but makes unclear or unwarranted connections to the assigned
task. |
Conveys a basic understanding of the course
material; makes few or superficial connections between the Goals,
Assumptions, & Objectives of the GE Category and the assigned task. |
Conveys a basic understanding of the course material; makes
implicit connections between the Goals, Assumptions, & Objectives of the
GE Category and the assigned task. |
Conveys a thorough understanding of the course material;
makes clear and explicit connections between the Goals, Assumptions, &
Objectives of the GE Category and the assigned task. |
Reveals an in-depth analysis of the course material; makes
insightful connections between the Goals, Assumptions, & Objectives of
the GE Category and the assigned task. |
Appendix
2:� Student Learning Outcomes
for Each General Education
Category
LEARNING OUTCOMES |
Students will demonstrate: 1.) an understanding of the methods scientists use to explore natural phenomena, including observation, hypothesis development, measurement and data collection, experimentation, evaluation of evidence, and employment of mathematical analysis; 2.) knowledge of the principles of one or more of the natural sciences; and 3.) the application of scientific data, concepts and models in one or more of the natural sciences and relate the relevant technology and principles they have studies to modern life. |
GE 3.� Social Sciences
LEARNING OUTCOMES |
Students will demonstrate: 1.) an understanding of the methods social scientists use to explore social phenomena, including observation, hypothesis development, measurement and data collection, experimentation, evaluation of evidence, and employment of mathematical and interpretive analysis; 2.) knowledge of major concepts, models and issues of at least one discipline in the social sciences. |
GE 4.�
LEARNING OUTCOMES |
Students will demonstrate: 1.) knowledge of a basic
narrative of American history such as: political, economic, social, and cultural,
including knowledge of unity and diversity in American society; 2.) an
understanding of common institutions in American society and how they have
affected different groups (including ethnic minorities and women); 3.) an
understanding of |
LEARNING OUTCOMES |
Students
will be able to: 1.) describe within an historical context major Western
political, geopolitical, economic, social, and/or intellectual developments;
2.) analyze the relationship between the development of ideas and historical
change in Western and other regions of the world; and 3.) discuss distinctive
features of contemporary Western civilization in terms of such areas as
history, institutions, economy, society and culture. |
LEARNING OUTCOMES |
Students
will be able to: 1.) demonstrate an understanding of the distinctive features
of the history, institutions, economy, society, culture, etc., of one
non-Western civilization; 2.) compare and/or contrast another contemporary
culture or other contemporary cultures with the dominant themes of U.S.
culture; and 3.) demonstrate an understanding of cultural differences in
world views, traditions, cultural institutions, values, social systems,
languages and means of communication. |
GE 7.� Humanities
LEARNING OUTCOMES |
Students
will: 1.) be able to critically respond to works in the humanities; 2.) be
able to discuss major human concerns as they are treated in the humanities;
and 3.) demonstrate an understanding of the conventions and methods of at
least one area in the humanities. |
GE 8.� The Arts
LEARNING OUTCOMES |
Students will demonstrate an understanding of: 1.) at least one principal form of artistic expression and the creative process inherent therein; and 2.) the significance of artistic expression in past and/or present civilizations. |
LEARNING OUTCOMES |
Students will demonstrate: 1.) basic proficiency
in the understanding and use of a foreign language; and 2.) an understanding
of the distinctive features of culture(s) associated with the language they
are studying. |
10b. Basic Communication: Presentation Skills
LEARNING OUTCOMES |
Students will: 1.) develop proficiency in oral discourse; and 2.) demonstrate the ability to evaluate an oral presentation according to established criteria. |
LEARNING OUTCOMES |
Students will: (a) perform the basic operations of
personal computer use; (b) understand and use basic research techniques; and
(c) locate, evaluate, and synthesize information from a variety of sources. |
APPENDIX 2
Committee on Committees � Report to the
Faculty Senate
�������������
J. Barry, Chair �
Item # 1
The ballots were
tallied for the referendum on restructuring the Faculty Senate.� Therre were 235 valid ballots and 15 invalid
ballots.� The results were:
����������� 118 in favor
����������� 117 opposed
The two-thirds
requirement was not met, so the referendum did not pass.
Item # 2
The following
committee appointments are being recommended, and confirmation by the Faculty
Senate is required:
At Large:
�
Educational
Policy Committee (Academic At-Large) � appointed, 2-year term � David Barclay
�
Facilities
and Master Plan Oversight Committee � appointed, 3-year term � Chris Cirmo
School of Arts
& Sciences:
Arts
& Sciences At Large
Fine
Arts & Humanities
�
College
Curriculum Review Committee - appointed, 2-year term � Cindy Benton
�
Educational
Policy Committee � appointed, complete unexpired term 07-09 � Andrea Lachance
Library
Professional
Staff:
Item # 3
The Faculty Senate
officers and committee elections have been conducted with the following
results:
Vice Chair � Kathy
Lawrence
Secretary � Janet
Duncan
Treasurer � John
Shedd
GE Committee:
����������� Academic at large (2008-10) � Donna
West
����������� Fine Arts & Humanities (2008-10)
� John Hartsock
����������� Professional Studies (2008-10) � Joy
Hendrick
����������� Professional Staff (2007-09,
complete unexpired term) � Valerie Jones
ASC:
����������� At large (2008-11) � Henry Steck
Committee on
Committees:
����������� Math/Science (2008-10) � Gayle
Gleason
����������� Education (2008-10) � Emilie Kudela
����������� Professional Studies (2008-10) �
Kate Coffey
����������� Professional Staff (2008-10) �
Jennifer Janes
����������������������������������������������������������������������� APPENDIX 3
����������������������������������� ���� Memo regarding Professional Affairs
Committee
����������������������� �� H. Botwinick, Chair, Review of
Governance Committee �
On page 18 of the detailed grid
entitled �Proposed Changes to Senate Standing Committees� (Part One) the
Review of Governance Committee
notes the following:
The Review of Governance
Committee strongly recommends that the Senate add a Professional Affairs
Committee as an additional
Standing Policy Committee of the Senate.�
The proposed committee would
essentially provide the
functional equivalent of the Faculty Affairs Committee for professionals.
We further recommend that an ad
hoc Senate committee be set up in order to determine the make-up and
duties of this new standing
committee.� All members of this ad hoc
committee should be professional staff,
and membership should be elected
from the following �functional areas:�
Chair elected at large from
professional staff
1 rep from enrollment management
1 rep from student affairs
1 rep from information resources
1 rep from academic affairs
1 rep from finance and
mgt/institutional advancement
3 at-large reps from professional
staff
I therefore move that the Faculty
Senate approve these recommendations by the Governance Committee and
that the Senate approve the
immediate formation of an ad hoc committee of professionals who will be charged
with proposing the eventual make
up and duties of this new Senate committee.
Pending Senate approval of the ad
hoc committee�s recommendation, these proposals would then be placed
in a fall referendum which will
include a number of additional charges to the Senate�s committee structure
and bylaws.
����������������������������������������������������������������������� ����� APPENDIX
4
Message from Karen Stearns,
Chair, CTE Committee, 042608 to Karla Alwes Regarding the TE
Committee�s Role in Online Course
Evaluation � Discussion for Next Faculty Senate Meeting
Dear Karla,
This is the essence of the
interest in the TE Committee from Gail Wood and Dan Sidebottom �
The
campus now has the ability to move CTE�s to an electronic process through
Banner/Web. It
could
be optional, with faculty choosing to either use the electronic process or the
(current)
semi-automatic
process (with the bubble questionnaires, SCANtron).� This would make the full
CTE
process available for hybrid and online courses.
PROPOSAL
FOR SHORT TERM� To run a pilot during the Summer sessions especially since many
of
the courses are online. This pilot would use the same form now used. No
questions would be added
or
deleted.
questions,
especially about the online learning environments.
PROPOSAL
FOR LONG TERM: To address process for adding questions, specifically questions
that
access
online learning.
QUESTION:
What role would the Senate like the TE committee to play in either of these
processes? What
kind
of approval, if any, does Academic Computing need to initiate the pilot? As for
the second charge, what
role,
if any, might the TE Committee play in adding questions that assess student experiences
in online or hybrid
courses.
Again, whose permission is necessary before Academic Computing revises the
current CTE form?
If
you would me to clarify further, please let me know. I will take whatever the
Senate says in response back to
the
committee.
Thanks
Karla!!
Karen
Karen
Stearns, Ph.D.
http://www.cortland.edu/senate/minutes/0708min14.html