MEMBERS - Listed Alphabetically
Eric Amsel
Rick Bingham
Sharen Brady
Delroy Brinkerhoff
Quinn Campbell - Student - Excused
Michael Cena
Bruce Christensen
Trent Cragun - Student
Erika Daines - Tom Mathews representing
Betty Damask-Bembenek
Karen Dewey - Excused
Gary Dohrer - Excused
Rick Dove - George Comber representing
Anand Dyal-Chand - Admin
Dave Eisler - Admin.
Marcy Everest
Nick Ferre - Student - Excused
Ron Galli - Admin.
Dawn Gatherum
David Greene - Admin. - Excused
Frank Guliuzza - Excused
Bruce Handley - Steve Russell representing
Mark Henderson
Michelle Heward
Warren Hill
Ron Holt
Joan Hubbard - Excused
Ken Johnson
Sheree Josephson
Marie Kotter
Brenda Kowalewski
Jeff Livingston
Kathleen Lukken - Admin.
Jim Macdonald - Excused
Daniel Magda
Dwayne Meadows
Chloe Merrill
Judith Mitchell - Chair
Jill Newby
Diana Page
June Phillips - Admin. - Catherine Zublin representing
Richard Sadler - Admin. - Hal Elliott representing
Dan Schroeder
Randy Scott - Parliamentarian
Monika Serbinowska
Gene Sessions
Debbie Sheldon - Student
Sally Shigley - Excused
Mohammad Sondossi
Timothy Steele
Mali Subbiah
Alden Talbot, Vice Chair
President Paul Thompson - Admin. - Excused
Jennifer Turley
Michael Vaughan - Admin. - Excused
Wangari Wa Nyatetu-Waigwa
Lydia Wingate
Kay Brown, Secretary

1. ROLL CALL

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Motion: Moved to approve the minutes from the October 19, 2000 meeting.
Made: Gene Sessions
Second: Bruce Christensen
Outcome: The minutes were approved.

WSU GENERAL EDUCATION ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIO PROJECT – Eric Amsel Reporting.

Eric Amsel gave the final report of the two-year pilot study designed to assess the General Education program at Weber State University. "The project complements other program assessments of General Education which either survey students’ beliefs about their General Educational skills and their development at WSU (General Education Assessment Survey Project) or assess them on standardized tests (CAAP, C-BASE Testing)."

"The analyses suggest that there is evidence supporting WSU graduating senior students’ perceptions of their competence and progress in writing ability and numeracy. A large majority of seniors’ numeracy and writing skills were coded as competent. There was a tendency for more WSU Freshman/Sophomore than Junior/Senior students’ written and numerical performance to be coded as below competent. These data remain as only suggestive indicators of any actual progress made by students whose writing and mathematics performance would have to be assessed multiple times over the college years."

"They propose that a team continue to collect artifacts from students from who we already have coded artifacts. This follow-up over the next several years will allow for a longitudinal assessment of real progress in a small sample of students’ numeracy and writing skills. Such a longitudinal analysis will augment the present data and provide a better picture of the impact of a WSU education on students’ general education skills."

WSU ONLINE GUIDELINES FOR GOOD PRACTICE – Peg Wherry Reporting

Peg Wherry presented the WSU Online Guidelines for Good Practice. The University is concerned about the quality of online courses, the development of quality courses and their maintenance. The ad hoc committee drafted standards for online courses. The document has been distributed to the Curriculum & General Education Committee, faculty who are beginning to teach online for the first time and Department Chairs.

The aim of this document is to help faculty new to online teaching develop quality courses and to assist departments in assuring that online offerings represent the best of local practice. "The WSU Online development team in Continuing Education has been assigned responsibility for providing technical tools and orientation to teaching online and for assisting faculty at all stages of course development; the team is also responsible for providing technical support and assistance to students enrolled in online courses."

SALARY, BENEFITS, BUDGET AND FISCAL PLANNING COMMITTEE

Tom Mathews from the College of Arts & Humanities was recommended to the Faculty Senate to replace Joanne Lawrence on the Salary, Benefits, Budget and Fiscal Planning Committee.

Motion: Moved to have Tom Mathews represent the College of Arts and Humanities on the Salary, Benefits, Budget and Fiscal Planning Committee.
Made: Bruce Handley
Second: Dawn Gatherum
Outcome: The motion passed unanimously.

CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW, APPORTIONMENT AND ORGANIZATION COMMITTEE – Jeff Eaton, Chair

Jeff Eaton, Chair of the Constitutional Review, Apportionment and Organization Committee reported on the apportionment figures for 2000-2001.

Results with Colleges Ranked by the Highest Percentage Above a Whole Number

Motion: Moved to approve the apportionment for 2001-2002.
Made: Monika Serbinowska
Second: Dan Schroeder
Outcome: The motion passed unanimously.

CRAO Charge #1 - Draft a proposal for determining how Senate representation will be accomplished if there is a decrease in representation in a college and all members with additional years on their terms wish to serve.

Recommendation - In the event that there is a decrease in representation in a college and all members with additional years on their terms still wish to serve, a runoff election should be held in the individual college.

Motion: Moved to approve the recommendation by the CRAO Committee - In the event that there is a decrease in representation in a college and all members with additional years on their terms still wish to serve, a runoff election should be held in the individual college.
Made: Gene Sessions
Second: Warren Hill
Outcome: The motion passed unanimously.

CURRICULUM AND GENERAL EDUCATION COMMITTEE – Jim Wilson, Chair

Performing Arts - New Course Proposal for Alignment and Conditioning for Dance/Pilates - Dance 2250 and 4250.

New course proposal from Dance for Dance 2250/4250. This course which focuses solely on strength and alignment is an essential feature to a well-rounded dance program and provides students with the necessary tools for a host of dance related fields: dance education performance, choreography and dance therapies.

Motion: Moved to approve the new course proposal from Performing Arts for Alignment and Conditioning for Dance/Pilates - Dance 2250 and 4250.
Made: Alden Talbot
Second: Ron Holt
Outcome: The motion passed unanimously.

English/ESL (English as a Second Language) - Course change for Written Communication V - ESL 2510; Course deletions for Interactive Language Learning IV - ESL 2440 and Written Communication VI - ESL 2610.

ESL 2510 and 2610 are half semester classes and are both two credits each. They are proposing combining these two classes into one three hour class. They feel they can cover the same amount of material in a three credit hour class that runs the entire semester instead of the two existing classes, which run half of a semester each. Course content is not changing.

Motion: Moved to approve from English/ESL course change for Written communication V - ESL 2510; Course deletions for Interactive Language Learning IV - ESL 2440 and Written Communication VI - ESL 2610.
Made: Gene Sessions
Second: Mali Subbiah
Outcome: The motion passed unanimously.

RELEASE OF FACULTY EVALUATIONS

Motion: Moved to remove from the table the Release of Faculty Evaluation item tabled at the October 19, 2000 Faculty Senate meeting.
Made: Alden Talbot
Second: Mike Cena
Outcome: The motion passed unanimously.

Currently in the Release of Faculty Evaluation Data document the two standard questions that read:

1. Overall this course was: (1) ineffective (2) less than effective (3) satisfactory (4) effective (5) very effective

2. Overall this instructor was: (1) ineffective (2) less than effective (3) satisfactory (4) effective (5) very effective

Main Motion: Moved to amend the motion to approve the Process for Posting Faculty Evaluations and the Standard Questions as written and presented to the Faculty Senate.

The Faculty Senate discussed the use of the word "effective" verses "excellent" or the possibility of having the student describe the instructor and the course.

Amended Motion: Moved to amend the main motion to change the format of the two standard questions to read:

1. Overall I consider this instructor to be an excellent teacher:         1          2           3          4           5

2. Overall I consider this course to be an excellent course:       1       2          3           4          5

Made: Randy Scott
Second: Ron Holt
Outcome: The motion failed with 7 abstentions.

Item #3 The evaluation data from the two standard questions will be released by class, listing instructors was discussed. The intent of this item is to release data under each faculty member teaching each specific course.

Also discussed was whether there should be a certain percentage of students from each class filling out the evaluations. Eighty percent was suggested so that students would have reliable data representing the majority of the students in the class.

Information is currently being gathered and used with the instructor controlling the day, the section and the class to be evaluated. It was stated that for data to be reliable, sixty percent of the students in the class would need to participate in the evaluation.

As stated in the document, Release of Faculty Evaluation Data, current policy and practice (PPM 8-11) regarding faculty evaluations will be followed.

The possibility of adding a third standard question was discussed. This question could read:

Overall the student’s effort was considered to be:

(1) Much less than average (2) Less than average (3) Average (4) More than average (5) Much more than average

Motion: Moved to add a third standard question to read: Overall the student’s effort was considered to be:  (1) Much less than average (2) Less than average (3) Average (4) More than average (5) Much more than average
Made: Diana Page
Second: Dwayne Meadows
Outcome: The motion failed with 2 abstentions.

PROCESS FOR POSTING FACULTY EVALUATION DATA

Current policy and practice (PPM 8-11) regarding faculty evaluations will be followed.

A generic faculty evaluation form including two standard questions will be distributed this Fall to all departments. Departments can use the generic evaluation form from the Faculty Senate Office or add the two standard questions to their department faculty evaluation form. The two standard questions will be identified to the students as the questions from which data will be compiled and the results made available.

The evaluation data from the two standard questions will be released by class, listing instructors.

A full distribution of student responses to the two standard questions will be released.

Data from Fall and Spring Semester evaluations will be compiled through the Institutional Research Office and made available at the Reserve Desk in the Library.

STANDARD QUESTIONS

Data from the following two questions will be compiled and released.

1. Overall this course was (1) ineffective (2) less than effective (3) satisfactory (4) effective (5) very effective

2. Overall this instructor was (1) ineffective (2) less than effective (3) satisfactory (4) effective (5) very effective

How long the information and the process will be kept was discussed.

Amended Motion: Moved to keep the process as a pilot for three years and then revisit the issue to see if the process is of value.
Made: Michelle Heward
Second: Ron Holt
Outcome: The motion passed with 18 in favor and 12 against.

Some departments have done Fall semester evaluations. It is late in the semester and departments who have not done their evaluations need to see what they can do. Officially, this policy will need to go into effect campus-wide Spring Semester 2001.

Previous Question: Jennifer Turley
Outcome: The motion passed

Main Motion: Motion from the October 19, 2000 Faculty Senate Meeting. Moved to approve the Process for Posting Faculty Evaluations and the Standard Questions as written and presented to the Faculty Senate.
Made: Gene Sessions
Second: Alden Talbot
Outcome: The motion passed with 14 in favor and 13 opposed.

ADJOURN 
The meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m.