Academic Council Minutes
October 18, 2001

Present: Faye Vowell, June Decker, Al Milligan, George Muncrief, Bertha Benavidez, Ken Ladner, Junius Logan, Lou Ollivier, Jerry Harmon, Larry French, Katherine Woodard, Ben Tucker.

Guest: Onorina Franco Recorder: Marcia Harris-Bourdette

1. Allocation of Workstudy Positions:

Onorina Franco discussed workstudy allocations. In the past the President and the Vice Presidents decided how workstudies were allocated. Allocations have not changed for four or five years. Dr. Ladner mentioned that a re-allocation of workstudies should be considered. Dr. Vowell was reluctant to re-allocated workstudies without input. A sub-committee was formed to consider a process for re-allocation. The sub-committee consists of Dr. Ladner, Dr. Muncrief, and Dr. Miller. Dr. Ladner will serve as chair.

2. Program Review Format:

An example was presented that has been used by Math & Computer Science. CHE does require department review, but does not specify the format. The abbreviated format should be used for this year and Dr. Logan and Dr. Vowell will review the longer document to make sure this is, in fact, a distillation of the BOR. Dr. French asked that a copy of the previous program review for each discipline be made available and that it include CHE's ratio. French believes it would be helpful to have the formula for each discipline broken down by lower division, upper division, and graduates. Dr. Vowell asked Dr. Logan to work with Judith Lawrence to get this information. All Academic Council members indicated that they would like to have this information. Dr. Vowell will pull out the time line from the longer document in order to follow the Regents' policy and will communicate via e-mail.

3. Vacation Policy for Graduate Assistants:

Dr. Ollivier asked for further clarification of Mary Cowan's December 11, 1998, letter regarding vacation policy for graduate assistants. Dr. Decker stated that graduate assistants are to work 20 hours a week. Dr. Harmon verified this, but mentioned that Human Resources had its own issues with this situation. There appears to be no hard policy regarding graduate assistant vacation time. Dr. French and Dr. Woodard pointed out that flexibility in this instance may be called for. Dr. Vowell brought up the philosophical concern between treating graduate assistants like students or hourly paid employees. The Graduate Council discussed this issue last year and recognized that graduate assistants are used differently from department to department. The question was raised as to whether departments wanted to live with the policy set forth by Mary Cowan or do they want to revise it. Dr. Milligan mentioned that graduate assistants be informed when they take the job what is expected of them. Dr. Vowell stated that the Vice President's office doesn't distinguish between academic and administrative graduate assistants. An administrative graduate assistant would be in an administrative department, and an academic graduate assistant would be in an academic department. Dr. French suggested that some type of job description should be developed to distinguish between teaching and research assistants. Dr. Muncrief stated that each department should be allowed to allocate graduate assistantships as they desire. Dr. Harmon made a motion that both statements be combined as follows: " Nine month academic graduate assistants' and twelve month administrative graduate assistants' work hours will be based upon negotiations with the individual units involved and the needs of that unit; e.g., if an office is open during a scheduled break, the graduate assistant may be expected to work all or a part of that break period." Dr. Vowell asked Dr. Harmon to write up this proposed language change and distribute same for discussion at the next meeting.

4. FIPSE Grant:

Dr. Logan discussed WNMU's FIPSE Grant in the amount of $300,000. This is a congressional allocation for increased access to educational opportunities through distributed education. Feel free to contact Dr. Logan regarding this grant.

5. MBO Discussion:

A draft of the Humanities Department MBO numerical system was discussed. The qualitative vs. the quantitative aspects of this formation were also discussed. The Faculty Handbook requires numerical quantification. Dr. Vowell would like for each chair to send her what the numbers mean to each department. Dr. French suggested that the Chairs write a justification for percentages given to faculty when MBOs are given to the VPAA. Dr. Vowell stated that more consistency is needed. Dr. Milligan will work on a format to be completed by November 1.

6. Monthly Budget Updates:

Give any comments regarding monthly budget update forms to Dr. Logan.

7. Equipment Allocation:

Dr. Vowell reported difficulties in tracking equipment allocations from last year. The Business Office stated that if money wasn't spent it was still allocated and could be spent. But in reviewing the allocations for this year, the Business Office stated that the VPAA overspent $5,000 from last year and subtracted this figure from this year's allocation. Last year's expenditures are being reviewed by Dr. Logan. The VPAA's office will sort out last year's budget and see what funds are actually available for this year. Dr. Vowell asked the Chairs to pull together any records they have on equipment purchases made from the VPAA's equipment budget.

8. Advisors of Athletes:

As part of the AQIP Advising initiative, more concentrated training for faculty in advising, we also need to identify an advisor of record for each student in the Banner record. Dr. Vowell has asked Dr. Shook to conduct the faculty training session on NCAA regulations. Dr. Decker asked that the NCAA regulations be sent out for review. Dr. Vowell stated that departments should be aware of the special needs of WNMU's athletes. Dr. Harmon suggested that the Athletic Department should be seeking liaison channels with academic departments.

9. Student Evaluation Retention Policy:

Dr. Ladner asked for clarification on how long student evaluations should be retained. A call was placed to Tom Root, Senior Policy Analyst with CHE. CHE does not have a written policy, but advised that the university analyze what student evaluations are used for. If they are used for promotion and tenure, it might be useful to keep them for seven to nine years, which would include any tenure appeals.

The meeting was adjourned at 3:30 p.m.