Graduate School Administrative Board Meeting
Monday, January 26, 2009
Voting members: Beck-Frazier, Susan; Decker, Jim; Eakins, Stan; Ericson, Richard; Gemperline, Paul; Holte, Jim; Hough, Monica; Kasperek, George; Gallagher, Margie; Pokorny, Marie; Rouse, Art; West, Terry
Ex-officio members: Griffin, Dellana, Linner
Guests: Scott; Patterson, Belinda; Ries, Heather; Rhodes, Len
MEMBERS ABSENT: Bland, Sharon; Fonooni, Hamid; Mott, Vivian; Wilson, Ken
1) Call to order
The meeting was called to order by Dean Gemperline at 3:35 pm.
2) Approval of the January 12, 2009 GSAB minutes
Amendments to the minutes: Name correction to members present: ‘Susan Frazier’ should be changed to ‘Susan Beck Frazier’
3) Discussion of membership and roles of GSAB and Graduate Assembly
Dean Gemperline distributed a 2009 GSAB roster and asked members to check for accuracy of members’ voting status and method of unit selection
Dean Gemperline discussed his goal for greater engagement of Graduate Assembly with broader representation and input to the policy and decision-making process of the GSAB. To that end, he plans to schedule regular meetings of the Graduate Assembly and proposes use of small task forces, when needed, appointed from membership of Graduate Assembly to research, gather data, and give non-binding recommendations to GSAB for consideration and vote.
Graduate Assembly membership was discussed. Appendix F of the Faculty Manual states: “The Graduate Assembly shall include one graduate director from each academic department”…in each of the colleges and schools…”offering a graduate degree program….” After discussion, it was agreed that this language allows one graduate director per department, and in departments where there are more than one graduate program, only representative should be selected.
Stan Eakins noted that according to Appendix F, the Graduate Assembly makes recommendations to the dean of the Graduate School on policy issues referred to it by the Administrative Board and/or at least forty percent of the Administrative Board.
Dean Gemperline led a discussion on the flow of communication from GSAB to Graduate Assembly to all graduate faculty. Graduate directors shared how they communicate information from GSAB meetings to graduate directors, faculty, chairs and Deans.
4) Discussion of Issues related to Graduate Faculty Election Criteria
Dean Gemperline expressed concern over data showing 1200 graduate courses being taught spring 2009 by 727 faculty members whereas there are only 457 names on his list of approvedgraduate faculty.
Some concerns expressed by Faculty Senate were discussed regarding the call for submission and reapproval processfor graduate faculty election criteria because members of graduate faculty appointed according to unit code.
The current review process of graduate faculty appointments by Dean Gemperline entails comparing copies of each unit’s criteria with curriculum vitas for names submitted. In instances where the unit has no approved criteria, he is granting provisional faculty status of one year. Dean Gemperline will be working with Deans, Associate Deans, and department chairs in addressing this issue and sharing copies of unit criteria that have been approved.
It was the consensus of members present that the general qualifications for graduate faculty membership outlined in Appendix F are too vague and not measurable; however, some units resist criteria that is too prescriptive.
Rick Erickson requested that Dean Gemperline send each department a list of those faculty teaching graduate courses not on approved graduate faculty list.
5) Review and approval of Communication Sciences and Disorders graduate faculty election
6). Proposed changes & improvements in the admissions process, including items required -- For
Issue: Many delays in admissions decisions are caused byrequiring transcripts from all schools attended, particularly for enrollment many years ago. Possible solutions: (1)requiring an official transcript from the institution where applicant earned most recent baccalaureate or graduate degree for provisional review & acceptance with final acceptance continent upon receipt of all transcripts. (2) Requiring transcripts from institutions attended during a limited time period, for instance, institutions attended during the past ten year period
Move to more efficient calculation of GPA. Staff will move to computing the GPA using cumulative GPAs from all schools attended rather than computing it from individual course grades. Another possible solution: use GPA from institution where most recent baccalaureate degree or master’s earned in admissions formula
Under development— automatic feed of percentiles for standardized test scores in addition to raw scores – more useful information
Under development- implementation of Banner 8 feature that allows PINs to be reset by applicants during application process
Assignment of admission processors to particular colleges rather than assigning by letters of the alphabet. Disadvantage: will result in unbalanced work load during peak deadline periods
7) Review of minimum admission requirements
8) Announcement of Graduate Assembly meeting on Thursday, January 29
The meeting was adjourned at 5:03 PM.