Faculty Senate
MINUTES 
September 23, 1999

 MEMBERS - Listed Alphabetically
Scott Amos
Eric Amsel
Richard Beatch
Mark Biddle
Delroy Brinkerhoff
Michael Cena
Mike Chertudi - Student
Bruce Christensen
Bill Clapp - Excused
Erika Daines
Betty Damask-Bembenek
Tom Day
Karen Dewey
Rick Dove
Anand Dyal-Chand - Admin
Dave Eisler - Admin.
Ron Galli - Admin.
Jim Gaskill - Morris Sterrett representing
Dawn Gatherum
David Greene - Admin. - Excused
Frank Guliuzza - Parliamentarian
Bruce Handley
Mark Henderson
Warren Hill - Alden Talbot representing
Joan Hubbard
Debra Huber
Ken Johnson
Paul Joines
Brenda Kowalewski
Thom Kuehls
Jeff Livingston
Kathleen Lukken - Admin.
Jim Macdonald
Dwayne Meadows - Colin Inglefield representing
Judith Mitchell - Vice Chair
Randy Parker - Paul Eberle representing
June Phillips - Admin. - Catherine Zublin representing
Margaret Pilcher - Student - Excused
Valory Quick
Richard Sadler - Admin.
Dan Schroeder
Randy Scott
Candadai Seshachari - Chair
Gene Sessions
Sally Shigley
John Sillito - Joan Hubbard
John Sohl
Mohammad Sondossi
Timothy Steele
Adam Suttlemyer - Student
Alden Talbot
President Paul Thompson - Admin.
Jennifer Turley
Michael Vaughan - Admin
Wangari Wa Nyatetu-Waigwa
Lydia Wingate
Kay Brown, Secretary

1. ROLL CALL

2. INTRODUCTION B Barbara Keller, Dean of Students, was introduced to the Faculty Senate by Nandi Dyal-Chand.

POINT OF ORDER B Gene Sessions raised the question of Administrators substituting for Faculty Senate members. Frank Guliuzza, Parliamentarian, indicated that there was not a clear policy statement in the PPM, however, the PPM does indicate a clear delineation between the responsibilities of administrators and the role of Faculty Senate members. Dr. Seshachari, Chair of the Faculty Senate, ruled that Joan Hubbard, substituting for John Sillito, abstain from voting.

3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Motion: Moved to approve the minutes from the April 15, 1999 meeting
Made: Judith Mitchell
Second: Karen Dewey
Outcome: The minutes were approved.

4. FACULTY BOARD OF REVIEW

The Executive Committee recommended the name of Sue Harley to serve at Chair of the Faculty Board
of Review for the 1999-2000 academic year.

Motion: Moved to approve Sue Harley as Chair of the Faculty Board of Review for the 1999-2000
academic year.
Made: Judith Mitchell
Second: Sally Shigley
Outcome: The motion passed unanimously.

5. TEACHING, LEARNING AND ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE

The name of Shannon Butler was presented to the Faculty Senate to replace Patti Cost on the Teaching, Learning, and Assessment Committee.

Motion: Moved to accept Shannon Butler as a replacement for Patti Cost on the Teaching, Learning,
and Assessment Committee.
Made: Mike Cena
Second: Paul Joines
Outcome: The motion passed unanimously.

6. STUDENT SENATE PROPOSAL, BRIDGE THE GAP B Mike Chertudi.

This proposal recommends that a member of Faculty Senate be appointed by the Chair and ratified by the Faculty Senate to serve as an active voting member of the Student Senate.

It was suggested that the Faculty Senate approve the concept, with an opportunity to work out the details. The question was raised regarding workload. The Student Senate meets every Monday for a 2-4 hour block of time.

Motion: Moved to accept the concept of the Student Senate proposal, Bridge the Gap, requesting that a member of the Faculty Senate be appointed by the Chair and ratified by the Faculty Senate to serve as an active voting member of the Student Senate. The Executive Committee will work out the details and bring their recommendations to the Faculty Senate for approval.
Made: Karen Dewey
Second: Lydia Wingate
Outcome: The motion passed unanimously.

7. ACADEMIC RESOURCES AND COMPUTING B Jim Jacobs.

The PPM proposal describes the mission and policies of the AOpen Student Computer Labs@ at WSU. It was approved by the

Academic Resources and Computing Committee February 3, 1999. It is ARCC=s intent that this document be adopted into

WSU=s Policies and Procedures as section 2-12. No variation of this policy currently exists in the PPM.

Questions were raised regarding the specific listing of the AOpen Student Computer Labs,@and references to computer lab funding. The university has other labs that are not AOpen Student Computer Labs,@ and this policy would not regulate the other computer labs. AOpen Student Computer Labs@ need to somehow be designated.

Motion: Moved to send back the recommended PPM proposal from the Academic Resource and Computing
Committee to rework the document with the suggestions made by the Faculty Senate and then present it at the Faculty Senate meeting October 21, 1999.
Made: Ron Galli
Second: Mark Biddle
Outcome: The motion passed unanimously.

8. CURRICULUM AND GENERAL EDUCATION COMMITTEE B Jim Wilson, Chair

The program proposal for Criminal Justice Master of Science and course proposals for Contemporary Criminal Justice, CJ 6100, Research Methods In Criminal Justice, CJ 6110, Theories of Crime and Delinquency, CJ 6120, Law and Social Control, CJ 6130, Technology and Innovation in Criminal Justice, CJ 6140, Diversity Issues in Criminal Justice, CJ 6150, Seminar: Criminal Justice Policy Analysis, CJ 6160, Seminar: Juvenile Justice, CJ 6170, Seminar: The American Criminal Court, CJ 6210, Seminar: Contemporary Law Enforcement, CJ 6220, Seminar: Contemporary Corrections, CJ 6230, Criminal Justice Planning, Budgeting, and Evaluation, CJ 6240, Special Topics in Criminal Justice, CJ 6250, Graduate Readings, CJ 6260, and Thesis, CJ 6270 were presented.

Questions were raised regarding instructors, funding, resources, and faculty compensation. The Criminal Justice Department anticipates beginning the Criminal Justice Master Program with 2 new faculty members. In general, they anticipate that the courses will be taught as part of the faculty member=s load. They are looking at current policy in the Master of Education program and the Master of Accountancy program. In consultation with the Provost, they are discussing charging differential tuition. They anticipate that the program will begin the first year with 25 students and then add an additional 25 students the second year. The Criminal Justice Department dose not want to take away from the effectiveness of the undergraduate program. Currently there are 650 declared majors in Criminal Justice.

Motion: Moved to accept the program proposal for Criminal Justice Master of Science and course proposals for Contemporary Criminal Justice, CJ 6100, Research Methods In Criminal Justice, CJ 6110, Theories of Crime and Delinquency, CJ 6120, Law and Social Control, CJ 6130, Technology and Innovation in Criminal Justice, CJ 6140, Diversity Issues in Criminal Justice, CJ 6150, Seminar: Criminal Justice Policy Analysis, CJ 6160, Seminar: Juvenile Justice, CJ 6170, Seminar: The American Criminal Court, CJ 6210, Seminar: Contemporary Law Enforcement, CJ 6220, Seminar: Contemporary Corrections, CJ 6230, Criminal Justice Planning, Budgeting, and Evaluation, CJ 6240, Special Topics in Criminal Justice, CJ 6250, Graduate Readings, CJ 6260, and Thesis, CJ 6270.
Made: Eric Amsel
Second Richard Beatch

Motion to Table Moved to table the above motion.
Made: Dan Schroeder
Second: Mark Biddle
Outcome The motion failed with 6 in favor and 22 opposed.

Main Motion

Outcome: The motion to accept the program proposal for Criminal Justice Master of Science and course proposals for Contemporary Criminal Justice, CJ 6100, Research Methods In Criminal Justice, CJ 6110, Theories of Crime and Delinquency, CJ 6120, Law and Social Control, CJ 6130, Technology and Innovation in Criminal Justice, CJ 6140, Diversity Issues in Criminal Justice, CJ 6150, Seminar: Criminal Justice Policy Analysis, CJ 6160, Seminar: Juvenile Justice, CJ 6170, Seminar: The American Criminal Court, CJ 6210, Seminar: Contemporary Law

Enforcement, CJ 6220, Seminar: Contemporary Corrections, CJ 6230, Criminal Justice Planning, Budgeting, and Evaluation, CJ 6240, Special Topics in Criminal Justice, CJ 6250, Graduate Readings, CJ 6260, and Thesis, CJ 6270 passed with 1 abstention.

Faculty Senate members were concerned that they have adequate information available to them on program proposals and course proposals so that they could have intelligent discussions and make intelligent decisions. It was suggested that a narrative be prepared by the department proposing new programs and courses, and that this information be posted or e-mailed as an attachment to Faculty Senate members.

9. ASSESSMENT B Kathleen Lukken

Assessing student outcomes has become an increasingly important issue at Weber State University. Program Review has existed for more than a decade. It was suspended during semester conversion. The Regents= policy, which dictates Program Review across the system was revised. We have, therefore, changed our processes accordingly. WSU is going to implement Program Review starting this year. The Program Review process has been modified and revised to reflect more accurately some of the assessment procedures that are taking place. Each department needs to develop a mission statement, develop statements of learning outcomes, and determine assessment tools.

ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 4:00