D R A K E U N I V E R S I T Y Minutes of the Faculty Senate meeting December 12, 2001 The regular meeting of the 2001-2002 Faculty Senate was called to order at 3:30 p.m. by President Charles Phillips. The following senators were present for all or part of the meeting: Allen, Cairns, Clapham, DeLaet, Gillespie, Klugman, Lovell, McKnight, Phillips, Pomeroy, Rankin, Reed, A. Sanders, B. Sanders, Simpson, Spencer, Symonds, Wright, David, Wright, Dean Absent: Hunter, Parsa Upon proper motion and vote the minutes of the November 2001 meeting were approved. Due to illness, President Maxwell was not in attendance. Remarks from Provost Troyer The Arts & Sciences Council has recently approved a 3+3 program with the Law School. Early in the Spring 2002 semester, Provost Troyer will send a request to the Faculty Senate that three issues be addressed. These are the a) incomplete grade assignment criteria, or the current lack of such University wide direction; b) the Day Free for Study and how that day is now used for many academic activities; and c) a number of policies that exist pertaining to final exam week which were written during a time when teaching was presented in a much more standard format. The current Campaign Drake has had a productive month of November. Provost Troyer attributed much of this recent progress to assistance from consultant Mr. John Whaley. There are positive signs that the campaign will end successfully during May 2002. Remarks from President Phillips Senators have a set of the approved athletic schedules distributed to them at this meeting. The Institutional Planning & Review Committee (IPRC) ballots have been sent via campus mail and the election results are expected by December 21st. The Executive Committee has sent to EPI the Program Review recommendation to review the length of the summer terms. Also from Program Review was a recommendation that the Schools rename themselves to Colleges. The Executive Committee requested the three units involved (Journalism & Mass Communication, Law, Education) submit their views on this issue and none of the affected faculties were in favor of this change. Consequently, the Executive Committee decided not to bring this issue to the full Senate. Unfinished Business Senators Reed moved from the table and David Wright seconded motion 02-11 amend the Academic Charter of Drake University, Appendix (G) “Mission Statement and Vision Statement” President Phillips gave a review of the changes made from the version presented at the November meeting. The word civic was added to the Mission statement and some formatting changes had been made. Senator Rankin requested an alteration to the placement of the word ‘the’ at the beginning of the three bullets points to create consistency. The suggestion was accepted. The motion passed with a unanimously vote. Mission Drake University is a community of learners. The mission of the University is to encourage and support the acquisition, application, and transmission of knowledge; the appreciation of the joys of discovery and the liberating power of knowing; and \ the development of abilities and perspectives that enable members of the community to pursue their goals and to make meaningful contributions in their personal, civic, and professional lives. Thus, all activities, resources, and structures are focused to the greatest extent possible on: the support of inquiry and the discovery of knowledge; the creation, implementation, and management of learning opportunities; the provision of guidance and support from recognized experts; the maintenance of an environment that is conducive to learning, personal growth, and community engagement; and the assessment and certification of learning outcomes. Vision Drake University shall maintain and enhance its position as the premier comprehensive university in the Midwest. At the same time, the University shall play a national leadership role as one of a select group of institutions (Associated New American Colleges) committed to the development and implementation of more effective paradigms for learning, faculty roles, and public service in higher education. Thus the activities of the University shall be concentrated on carefully selected liberal arts and sciences and professional programs. While global in its vision, outreach, and impact, Drake also shall serve its immediate community as an educational resource in the economic, cultural, and social development of Des Moines and Central Iowa. New Business: Senators David Wright moved and Klugman seconded motion 02-12 To approve the overall design and requirements of the AOI proposal by the Drake Curriculum Committee, Fall 2001; including the area descriptions that guide the selection of courses fulfilling each area. This replaces the current Outcomes component but does not alter the FYS or Senior Capstone components of the Drake Curriculum. Implementation would be for the Fall 2002 entering first year students. Drake Curriculum Director David Skidmore was invited to speak to the motion. He began by thanking the General Education Committee and Outcomes Committee, noting especially the work by Stuart Klugman. Mr. Skidmore presented questions concerning the proposal which had been directed to him prior to the meeting and addressed answers to those concerns. The proposal drops the Outcomes approach to better match what really happens at Drake. This is to be considered a mid-course correction to labeling for the Drake Curriculum. The implementation deadline, at the close of the Preface, outlines that current students can complete the program that they have begun or switch to the new Areas of Inquiry Drake Curriculum. The course listings for each Area of Inquiry will be complied by the registration period during the Spring 2002 semester, if the proposal is approved today. This is an ambitious timeline. There was a question concerning the timing of this proposal without the course lists. Mr. Skidmore replied that the committee wanted to get the design approved and then put effort into the course lists. There had been a question concerning the absence of the Speech requirement. This is a consequence of the RPAC report and President Maxwell’s support to eliminate Rhet 73, Fundamentals of Speech. The Rhetoric faculty do not want to teach the course. The Program Review report did call for speaking across the curriculum and we recommend that review be given to a Center for Writing. The full proposal has a description of a center. The creation of such a center is not part of the current motion. There has been a question as to why two courses in history and two courses in science are required, when only one course is stated for each of the other Area of Inquiries. Mr. Skidmore indicated that Americans are generally less historically aware and Drake has a unique two course ‘world’ history course. Science is woven into our daily lives and there is a difference between physical and life sciences. Mr. Skidmore continued that there are seats available in the history and the life science offerings to satisfy the general education needs. There is a real concern about the physical sciences area. There are currently limited courses for the non-majors. Some expanded capacity will to be created. One lab course will be required, not two, thus lab space is not an issue. There is also a new interdisciplincy course; actually two five credit courses, which could end up fulfilling the physical science/life science & math requirement. The new category, Engaged Citizen, was explained as preparing the students to be members of the global society. Senator Spencer asked if some courses simply ‘roll over’ from current approval lists or will all courses be asked to resubmit for Outcomes Committee approval. Mr. Skidmore replied that he did not know yet and encouraged faculty to not assume that their course would be in a category. Senator Klugman replied that he suspected that there will be two step approval process; a) submit syllabus and paragraph and b) some courses may be asked to be submitted for consideration. Senator Simpson requested clarification as to what portion of the document was the motion. Mr. Skidmore indicated up to Appendix A. Senator Clapham asked about the concern that there are North Central Association (NCA) requirements which indicate we set and achieved goals. Provost Troyer indicated he did not know of any red flag with this proposal and the NCA expectations. Assessment evidence is needed in the majors but the naming of the general education areas should not be an issue. Senator Pomeroy asked if there was any way to continue to work on the language of the AOI descriptions. Mr. Skidmore replied that the GEC felt that they had the right to make minor changes without coming to Senate. He did not want it to be fully an open ended discussion but if there is one area that is problematic; then GEC will look closely at that one. Senator Pomeroy indicated the Fine Arts faculty are dissatisfied with the AOI words of the artistic category. Senator Pomeroy moved and Rankin seconded an amendment to strike the Artistic AOI description and replace with the following. Drake students will learn to interpret and create art. Art constructs an essential and ongoing dialogue among individuals, cultures, and societies. All art-whether it takes written, visual, musical, or theatrical form-grows out of sustained intellectual inquiry. Drake students will recognize that art provides a distinctive way to engage the world. This requirement will be fulfilled through courses that inform and involve students to become analysts and participants in the artistic creative process. There was a discussion of several of the words and whether this new description would call for students to really take English literature classes for an Art requirement. Senator Spencer asked if a biblical poetry course would qualify. The answer was no. Senator Pomeroy stated the intent is to include written or scriptural types of within the dramatic arts. There were friendly amendments which brought the paragraph to be the following: Drake students will learn to interpret and/or create art. Art constructs an essential and ongoing dialogue among individuals, cultures, and societies. All art-whether it takes visual, musical, or theatrical form-grows out of sustained intellectual inquiry. Drake students will recognize that art provides a distinctive way to engage the world. This requirement will be fulfilled through courses that inform and involve students to become analysts of or participants in the artistic creative process. The replacement was accepted as a friendly amendment and no vote was taken. The discussion moved back to the main motion with a question from Senator Clapham concerning the new area of inquiry, the Engaged Citizen, and whether or not economic courses would be included. Mr. Skidmore stated that the analysis and debate of public issues would most likely qualify, macro economics. He did not believe that micro-economic would qualify. Senator Gillespie indicated that he did not have a problem with the two courses in Sciences. She did request more information about the history need for two separate courses. Mr. Skidmore replied that ideally students would take one course that is a broad history course and one in depth course. Senator Gillespie commented that if two courses are so important, why not have two courses in each category. Senator Symonds supported the two history requirement. She commented that History I and II cover 1000 years. She also commented that history is among the most consistently worst taught course in high schools. Senator Allen indicated that she liked many things in this proposal, but she had a hard time justifying only one course in the other areas. Senator Skidmore indicated that the committee was mindful of a threshold of credits at which there would be ‘too many’ for faculty & students to handle. There was a question of seats in any area and they had to make choices. The GEC felt that two areas were deserving of more credits: the sciences & humanities. Senator Allen indicated that she did not want to think that Drake’s curriculum is based on seats available rather than what we want to teach the Drake graduate. Senator Dean Wright remembered that the original vow was to create a Drake Curriculum which is unique, rather than a 10 code listing per category. Mr. Skidmore indicated that there is a desire to create a set of new and exciting courses, not core courses which everyone takes. The courses would be interdisciplinary and designed for general education. Senator Dean Wright liked that there was only one lab course required. He also asked if there was a commitment from more than a few instructors to this desire. Senator Clapham asked if our current general education is seen as unique. Director of Admission and Financial Aid Tom Willoughby was in attendance at the meeting and asked to give his perspective. He replied that he does not think that the Drake Curriculum sets Drake apart. He continued that he did not think that general education is one of the top five reasons a student chooses Drake. Mr. Skidmore indicated that they did survey students concerning the Curriculum. There were two main answers from the students: 1) why do I take any courses outside my major, and 2) they had a choice; rather than a core course system. Senator Pomeroy indicated that some degree programs in Fine Arts will, with this program, have very few credit hours outside the general education and majors. Senator Cairns asked if there is not a clear link between the AOI then why not the FYS can count within an area. The motion to suspend the rules and continue the meeting until 5:15 p.m. was made and passed. Senator Allen indicated that the GEC’s work is terrific and I do want people to get answers to their questions and concerns. She expressed concern that the Senate might move too quickly on the AOI change. Senator Simpson indicated that she, too would like this to be a good motion. She was concerned that the Senate needs to be in agreement philosophically and then committees can fill in the details of the course listings. She cautioned that Mr. Skidmore has said and presents in the motion rationale that there will shorter approved course lists. Senator Simpson expressed concern that this would create a cookie cutter general education. Senator Klugman agreed that the original committee had two tasks; to bring something from all colleges and create something new. The proposal as presented in the motion confirms what we as a campus choose to do. Senator Klugman indicated he is excited for what Mr. Skidmore has brought to the committee and the Senate; general education learning experiences. Senator Spencer commended the pragmatic based approach of this blend of the liberal arts and where the resources are to actually teach. Senator DeLaet liked the addition of the engaged citizen category. She asked if this emphasis will be on U.S. citizenship. The reply was yes. The motion to table failed with a show of hands vote. Senator Klugman welcomed to hear specific concerns about the content of the motion. Once known, he indicated that he and Mr. Skidmore would gladly work on those concerns. Senator Simpson indicated a desire for a clear working document of what was to become the Drake Curriculum. Senator Allen again stated that she had no negative feelings to the changes, but felt that this session was a fact finding question and answer time and the proposed changes are worth waiting another meeting. The motion passed. (13 yes, 0 nay, 4 abstentions) The meeting adjourned at 5:15 p.m. Submitted by Secretary, Nancy Geiger