Academic Governance Committee Report

Given to the University Senate 01-29-07

Submitted by Dr. Mike Gleason

1.  Shaina McGill gave a presentation on the assessment of Academic Advising.  One of the Chancellor’s Ten Initiatives is improving academic advising.  This is a system wide assessment in an effort to define attributes for all Academic Advisement models.  Dr. Stephanie McClure has created a survey for faculty response concerning advisement issues.

2.  Dr. Anne Gormly continued the discussion on her recommendations that she brought to the AGC from the Faculty Research Task Force Report.  Feedback from AGC concerned two recommendations: 1) Composition of Committee – whether members be appointed or elected 2) Separate the Awards from Faculty Research Committee.  After discussion ended, Dr. Gormly said she will charge the Deans to consult in their appointments, so that the appointed committee members may represent all four areas of scholarship as indicated by Boyers.  This cooperation is considered key, since each school can appoint only two members.

3.  Conversations both in and between the Academic Governance and the Executive Committees have clarified differences between “Policy” and “Administrative Procedures”.  There has also been a lengthy conversation about what constitutes new policy and what is existing policy as it pertains to motions. 

4.  AGC has reviewed its proposal (0607.AG.006.P) “Revision of Academic Dishonesty Procedures” and decided to request that Dr. Turner remove it from the motion database.  While the proposal, moved by the committee, entails extensive changes in administrative procedures concerning Academic Dishonesty have been recommended by AGC, there was no change in University Policy as regards student academic dishonesty.  Those interested may refer to AGC website for an overview of new administrative procedures that were approved by the AGC.  The administration is currently writing these new procedures into the catalogs and other handbooks of the university.

5.  There is currently an Amended Motion dealing with Participation in Commencement Activities that is Tabled.  I will note, that the motion as amended reflects only a change to current policy.  The current policy can be summarized as:

“…in order to participate in Spring Commencement,

students must complete all degree requirements.”

The amended motion is thus reduced to the following statement

“[an] exception to this rule will be those degree programs that require a

final capstone experience that is scheduled in the summer term.”

Among the administrative procedures that were recommended by the Council of Deans and by a majority of Academic Governance Committee members were requirements that

“Students must apply for Spring Commencement by September 1. By February 1, a final degree audit will be conducted to ensure that students who have applied for graduation have enrolled in their final course requirements. Any students who are not on track for completion in the spring term will be informed that they will not be allowed to participate in Spring Commencement.” 

It should be noted that these procedures are NOT part of the amended motion that is currently Tabled.  Moreover, it is the central task of the Senate to recommend Policy to the President.

6.  At our next meeting, on Friday, Feb 2., 2007, the AGC will consider a report detailing “Policy and Procedures on Scholarly Misconduct”.  The report was drafted by the Compliance Committee, an ad hoc committee appointed by VP Gormly to make recommendations regarding actions for compliance with federal and state guidelines.  Dr. Roy Moore chaired the committee.  The text of the draft is available on-line at the AGC website.