REGULAR MEETING OF THE UNIVERSITY FACULTY SENATE

APRIL 8, 2013 – 104 GORE HALL

OFFICIAL MINUTES

March 23, 2012

TO: Senators and Executives

FROM: Katherin Rogers, Vice President

University Faculty Senate

SUBJECT: Regular Faculty Senate Meeting April 8, 2013

In accordance with Section IV, paragraph 6 of the Constitution, the regular meeting of the University Faculty Senate will be held on Monday, April 8, 2013 at 4:00 p.m. in 104 Gore Hall. The General Faculty meeting will be held this month as well. This meeting will begin at 3:30 p.m. just prior to the Faculty Senate meeting and will also be held in 104 Gore Hall. Please make every effort to attend this meeting.

I certify that hard copies of the approval page for each undergraduate and graduate studies academic item on the agenda are filed in the Faculty Senate Office with the appropriate signatures of approval up through the Chair of the Faculty Senate Coordinating Committee on Education. The Agenda will be as follows:

Members Present: B. Ackerman, T. Angell, A Ardis, N. Brickhouse, M. Buell, J. Busch, V. Cassman, J. Courtright, J. Custer, J. Daniel, P. Dhurjati, P. Duker, R. Dyer, D. Ford, M. Gaffney, D. Galileo, N. Gaines-Hanks, N. Getchell, L. Gottfredson, M. Gutierrez, S. Hastings, T. Hsu, J. Jebb, A. Johnson, A. Jones, J. Jordan, J. Kallal, P. Laux, C. Mason, K. Matt, M. McLeod, D. Mikilitz, J. Morgan, J. Morrison, A. Muenchow, J. Mycoff, J. Naccarielli, B. Ogunnaike, L. Okagaki, M. O’Neal, S. Pollack, A. Poorani, M. Portnoi, M. Robinson, K. Rogers, D. Satran, N. Seymour, S. Shabo, C. Shen, A. Sivaraman, H. Tanner, N. Targett, B. Thibault, E. Tranby, M. Ussery, I. Vogel, G. Watson, M. Werth, R. Wisser, G. Wolf.

Members Excused: J. Gillespie, R. Golinkoff, S. Hansen, D. Reisman, M.Rieger, G. Shriver,

Members Absent: K. Booksh, M. Parent, C. Riordan, A. Shermeyer, T. Vermeer, B. Weber

AGENDA

I. Adoption of the Agenda: Agenda amended where resolution p (under new business) will be considered first.

Unanimously approved

II. Approval of the Minutes: March 4, 2013

Unanimously approved

III. Announcements: Senate President Sheldon Pollack

· Special Meeting of the Faculty Senate on April 29, 4pm in Gore 104 to discuss and perhaps vote on Promotion and Tenure proposals. Proposals will be distributed approximately two weeks in advance in order for the Senators to have time to consider and discuss with their colleagues.

· Other Annoucements

o Senate President Pollack’s Slides

IV. Item for Information: Student Life Student Code of Conduct Policy (attachment)

V. Consent Agenda

1. Announcements for Challenge:

a. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies (Fred Hofstetter, Chair) with the concurrence of the Coordinating Committee on Education (Deni Galileo, Chair) and the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) for the request to revise concentration: BA Interpersonal Communication (UGS 0188) (attachment)

b. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies (Fred Hofstetter, Chair) with the concurrence of the Coordinating Committee on Education (Deni Galileo, Chair) and the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) for the request to revise concentration: BA Mass Communication (UGS 0189) (attachment)

c. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies (Fred Hofstetter, Chair) with the concurrence of the Coordinating Committee on Education (Deni Galileo, Chair) and the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) for the request to revise Major: BS Psychology (UGS 0190) (attachment)

d. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies (Fred Hofstetter, Chair) with the concurrence of the Coordinating Committee on Education (Deni Galileo, Chair) and the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) for the request to add a minor in Sustainable Infrastructure (UGS 0222) (attachment) (revised attachment) (attachment)

e. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies (Fred Hofstetter, Chair) with the concurrence of the Coordinating Committee on Education (Deni Galileo, Chair) and the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) for the request to revise minor in Bioelectrical Engineering (UGS 0291) (attachment)

f. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies (Fred Hofstetter, Chair) with the concurrence of the Coordinating Committee on Education (Deni Galileo, Chair) and the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) for the request to revise Electrical Engineering Major – Add to list of foundation electives (UGS 0292) (attachment)

g. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies (Fred Hofstetter, Chair) with the concurrence of the Coordinating Committee on Education (Deni Galileo, Chair) and the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) for the request to revise Computer Engineering Major – Add to list of foundation electives (UGS 0293) (attachment)

h. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies (Fred Hofstetter, Chair) with the concurrence of the Coordinating Committee on Education (Deni Galileo, Chair) and the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) for the request to add an Honors degree with distinction Energy and Environmental Policy (UGS 0294) (attachment)

i. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Committee on Graduate Studies (Andrew Teplyakov, Chair) with the concurrence of the Coordinating Committee on Education (Deni Galileo, Chair) and the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) for the request to revise the graduate program in CIS – PhD (GRD0279) (revised attachment GRD0279) (attachment)

j. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Committee on Graduate Studies (Andrew Teplyakov, Chair) with the concurrence of the Coordinating Committee on Education (Deni Galileo, Chair) and the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) for the request to revise the graduate program in CIS – MS (GRD0286) (revised attachment 0286) (attachment)

k. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Committee on Graduate Studies (Andrew Teplyakov, Chair) with the concurrence of the Coordinating Committee on Education (Deni Galileo, Chair) and the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) for the request for approval of allowing transfer of graduate credits beyond nine credits in support of the MCHE Degree as detailed in the attached documentation (GRD 0288) (attachment) (attachment)

Consent agenda is adopted unanimously.

VI. Regular Agenda

1. Unfinished Business: None

2. New Business:

a. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies (Fred Hofstetter, Chair) with the concurrence of the Coordinating Committee on Education (Deni Galileo, Chair) and the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) for the request for permanent approval of the BS in Linguistics and Cognitive Science (UGS0250) (attachment) (review team attachment)

WHEREAS, the Department of Linguistics and Cognitive Science has been offering the BS in Cognitive Science for five years and the number of majors has grown from 15 to 195, and

WHEREAS, Cognitive Science is a truly interdisciplinary study that meets all of the goals of undergraduate education and fits the Path to Prominence, and

WHEREAS, the most prestigious universities in the nation offer degrees in cognitive science, and

WHEREAS, students who have graduated with a BS in Cognitive Science have an excellent acceptance rate into graduate school, including in applied fields like speech/language pathology that will benefit the community, be it therefore

RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate recommends permanent status for the BS in Cognitive Science, effective September 1, 2013.

Resolution a is adopted unanimously

b. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies (Fred Hofstetter, Chair) with the concurrence of the Coordinating Committee on Education (Deni Galileo, Chair) and the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) for the request for permanent approval and revision to the BA in Black American Studies (UGS0248) ( attachment) (review team report) (resolution)

WHEREAS, the Department of Black American Studies has successfully transitioned from a program with academic beginnings dating back to 1972 to a department in 2010 with a vibrant undergraduate and graduate intellectual community, and

WHEREAS, the Black American Studies major has successfully matriculated a number of undergraduate students who are now pursuing graduate studies in law, medicine, political science, history, and other fields of study that support the interdisciplinary nature of this major, and

WHEREAS, the Department of Black American Studies has existing core and joint faculty and courses to support the offering of a major and related experiences necessary to provide a transformative education that meets general education, multicultural and discovery learning experiences within the College of Arts and Sciences and the University of Delaware at large, and

WHEREAS, the Department of Black American Studies has undergone the Permanent Status Program Review process whereby provisionally approved programs progress to permanent status, be it therefore

RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate recommends that permanent status be granted for the BA in Black American Studies

Resolution b is adopted unanimously

c. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Committee on Graduate Studies (Andrew Teplyakov, Chair) with the concurrence of the Coordinating Committee on Education (Deni Galileo, Chair) for the request to add a new MA in Speech-Language Pathology (GRD 0270) (attachment) (attachment) (attachment) (attachment resolution) (budget attachment) (budget attachment 2)

WHEREAS, there is a well-documented need for speech-language pathologists serving Delaware residents in schools, and also in clinics serving Delawareans across the lifespan, and with the nation-wide demand for these professionals projected to grow by 23% between 2010 and 2020 by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and

WHEREAS, the College of Health Sciences is ideally positioned to develop such a program, because of clear synergies with our top-ranked physical therapy program, as well as the opportunity to create optimal clinical facilities to support the program in our transition of the College to the STAR campus, and

WHEREAS, the College of Health Sciences has brought in several consultants who have gone through the process of establishing master’s programs in speech-language pathology, (the degree required for licensure in all states), to provide expert advice for the development of the proposed curriculum and related budget, and

WHEREAS, budget projections carefully reviewed by financial analysts in both the University Budget Office and the Provost’s Office show the program becoming self-sustaining after four years of operation, and

WHEREAS, the proposed program will contribute to the University's "Path to Prominence": to become a premier research and graduate university; be it therefore

RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate recommends, provisionally for five years, the establishment of a new M.A. in Speech-Language Pathology, and be it further

RESOLVED, that the College of Health Sciences will not launch the program in the absence of identified sources of full financial support for the first four years of operation.

Original Resolution c

Senator Hastings asked the question about why we would approve it like this now instead of waiting until they have the money and then come back to the Senate for full approval.

Sheldon Pollack asked Susan Hall and Kathy Matt to help answer.

Dean Kathy Matt stated that the question on the table was this a program that fits for the university and the answer is that we definitely have students that want to take this and that it is a good fit for HS. She also stated that Susan has put a budget together and the question is will the university support this curriculum. And if that’s a yes then they can go out and raise the funds. The approval of this is needed to move out into the community to raise money. If the curriculum isn’t approved then there is no need to go out into the community to raise the dollars.

Susan Hall stated that their first task was to get the curriculum approved so they could move forward and negotiate funds from the state as well as other sources. Grant funding is a potential, private donations, etc. They are willing to beat the bushes but in the absence of an approved plan they are not going to do one thing. She stated that they feel it will take another year to secure the funds, but they need the curriculum now.

Allen Fox asked if this will have to come back to the Senate for final approval of the program once the funding was in place? Engineering was cited as a reason for the Senate to be cautious. If the money is not there is has to come from somewhere else.

Senate President Sheldon stated that the provost won’t pick up the tab.

Dean Kathy Matt stated that they are in the black now and they would not jeopardize other programs to do this.

Provost Brickhouse stated that there are checks and balances because the Office of the Provost has to approve hiring and that they would not hire faculty into a program that wasn’t funded. They would not jeopardize other programs.

Senator Morgan updated the senators that he had gone over to the Dean’s Office to talk with Kathy and Susan. They reached an agreement that the resolution would be re-drafted so that we were approving only the curriculum at this meeting. The most urgent need is getting the curriculum approved. The recommendation for establishment of the program would come in the future. Senator Morgan… “when likely sources, and amounts of full financial support, for the first several years of operation of this program have been specified by the Dean of the College of Health Sciences.” He stated that he had sent this to Deni Galileo, the chair of the Coordinating Committee on

Education, and Senator Galileo sent it to the Executive Committee and to the Coordinating Committee on Education there was some fine tuning of what was sent. Senator Morgan stated that Senator Galileo is showing his a red-line copy here which he asked the Senate President if he had the document available.

Sheldon stated that he had done John’s work by bringing the document to present, but that the Agenda cannot be changed on Saturday evening when it had already gone out nearly a week ago.

A motion for an amendment was made and seconded. An amendment to change the resolution is on the floor. John Courtright stated that we are approving a degree with no faculty or no funding. He’s in favor of the amendment that is on the floor.

Susan Hall says they don’t object to the amendment, but they would love to have approval of the original motion so they don’t have to come back to the Senate.

Senator Steve Hastings suggested that other programs don’t always have this kind of cost.

Senator Amy Johnson disagreed. She thinks this program is comparable to other doctoral programs and that the senate should approve this.

Senator Deni Galileo stated that in the past the CCE has not insisted on a budget, but the instructions clearly asks for a budget. So, the Coordinating Committee should ask for a budget for all new programs. It’s part of the instructions for approving new programs. It’s there for a reason and Senator Galileo thinks it’s a good reason.

Senator Martha Buell feels this program is a victim of the contextual historical circumstances within which its Dean submitted… the comment was made during the President’s remarks… had he seen the Faculty Survey results. She thinks there is a lot of concern at this point around transparency and budgets and frankly fear. So, she feels another alternative is that HS actually do hire faculty to man or woman this program and then the budgeting formulas for whatever reason … again it could be contextual we don’t know; we don’t know what’s going to happen to the economy. Faculty could be hired and then they would have to be let go and it was mentioned that they would be tenure track faculty, so that’s a whole pandora’s box of issues, she stated. Senator Buell also stated that it’s not so much the program but it’s fiscal concerns.

President Sheldon Pollack agrees and stated that he told the Dean not to take it personally.

Dean Targett states that there is no down side because they stated that they wouldn’t hire faculty until they got the funding. She feels that the Dean is being very fiscally responsible. They presented the budget and stated that they will not do anything until they get the funding. It strikes Dean Targett that they are acting very fiscal responsibly and that they should have the program approved.

Senator Jim Morrison stated that the resolution doesn’t actually state that the funding would come from outside the university and he fears that another Dean would end up having to fund the program.

Mary Martin speaks on behalf of the Grad Studies Committee. She feels it should be approved as a full program. That she doesn’t even know what it means to approve curriculum and not the program. She feels the Graduate Studies Committee would not have approved it with-out the full program being approved.

Senator John Jebb asked the Dean to answer a question “can you comment on the long term security of the external funding?”

Dean Matt brought to his attention the budget and stated that if one looks at the budget in the fifth year it’s moving into the black. The 4.8 million is needed to start the program and will then continue it on and then it’s in the black and is generating income. Dean Kathy Matt added an additional comment about what’s going to happen in the future. There is a need for the program and that students graduating from Linguists and Cognitive Sciences want to take this program. The added plus is that the state sees the need and will give funding as well. Again, it is all external funding.

Dean Okagaki follows up on Mary Martin’s comment. She feels it makes it more difficult to get external funding with- out the program… the degree being approved. She also agrees with Dean Target that there is no down side to approving the program.

Senate Vice President Kate Rogers understood the amendment to make the program sound wonderful, but the problem that most senators are speaking to is that the College of Arts and Sciences has a hiring freeze and it makes it hard to approve new programs when the university already can’t meet its current commitments.

Dean Matt reiterated that what they really need today is the curriculum.

Maggie Andersen commented that she’s not a senator, but she feels that in the resolution a senator could insert the word external and that would address fears that other sources may end up funding this. Maggie stated that as Dean Okagaki states it would be difficult for external funding to be obtained with-out the program being approved.

President Sheldon asks if an amendment should be made to insert the word “external.”

Senator Steve Hastings states that he could make the same argument for all new programs and that we are setting a dangerous precedent approving curriculum with-out a program, and that the funds should be secured first. The monies should be identified first he stated.

Senator Irene Vogel is concerned that they want external funding for four years. What happens after the four years, she asked.

Dean Matt said that the program will support itself.

Senator Vogel stated that she wasn’t sure about that because the clinics didn’t seem to be making money.

Dean Matt stated that the clinics usually don’t make money and the best one can hope for is to break even with the clinics. One of the reasons to do the clinics is that when students train here they stay here she said. Clinics usually don’t make money they are for research and learning.

President Pollack stated he would entertain one last comment.

John Morgan feels it’s a good program and that there is a need for it in the State of Delaware. The concerns that Senator Morgan has are budgetary. Senator Morgan is concerned that the tuition is more than any other graduate program here at UD. It’s 10 thousand dollars more than any other graduate program here. He feels the fear that others have is that the state could appropriate 5 million for this program and then give the entire university 5 million less due to this. Senator Morgan feels that all the state has asked us to do is to approve the curriculum and that is what he wants to do today.

Dean Kathy Matt thanked the Senate and others for helping them on all levels. She said they knew it was going to be complicated, but they are grateful for the issues that have been brought up. The most important thing is finding a way to get approval so they can move forward.

Provost Brickhouse stated that she has never seen the faculty senate do anything like this. Who will the program come back to? Will it have to go back through the approval process or come straight to the Senate, she asked.

President Sheldon Pollack stated that they would come back to Grad Studies and Coordinating Committee on Education.

Senator Jim Morrison would like to insert the word “external” to the current amendment… “likely external sources…”

Senator John Morgan suggested that it is unnecessary. He said he just wants to see the numbers prior to giving approval.

Senator Morrison’s Amendment to Sen. Morgan’s is to keep the original plus the world “External” in the last Resolved – 17 to 24 not in favor. This motion failed.

Sen. Morgan’s Amendment to the resolution – 34 votes for & 14 against – Amended resolution approved.

The amended resolution is as follows:

WHEREAS, the College of Health Sciences is ideally positioned to develop such a program, because of clear synergies with its top-ranked physical therapy program, as well as the opportunity to create optimal clinical facilities to support this program in the transition of the College to the STAR campus, and

WHEREAS, the College of Health Sciences has brought in several consultants who have gone through the process of establishing master’s programs in speech-language pathology (the degree required for licensure in all states) to provide expert advice for the development of the proposed curriculum and related budget, and

WHEREAS, the proposed program, if established, will contribute to the University's "Path to Prominence": to become a premier research and graduate university; be it therefore

RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate ~~recommends, provisionally for five years,~~ ~~the establishment of a~~ approves the curriculum of the proposed new M.A. in Speech-Language Pathology, and be it further

~~RESOLVED, that~~ ~~the College of Health Sciences will not launch the program in the absence of identified sources of full financial support for the first four years of operation.~~

RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate shall consider recommending the establishment of a new M.A. in Speech-Language Pathology when likely sources and amounts of full financial support for the first several years of operation of this program have been specified by the Dean of the College of Health Sciences.

d. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Committee on Graduate Studies (Andrew Teplyakov, Chair) with the concurrence of the Coordinating Committee on Education (Deni Galileo, Chair) and the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) for the request to add a Master of Arts in Social Studies in World History (GRD 0281) (attachment) (attachment) (attachment) (resolution attachment) (attachment) (attachment) (attachment) (attachment) (attachment) (attachment) (attachment) (attachment) (attachment) (attachment) (budget attachment)

WHEREAS, The Master of Arts in Social Studies in World History will provide an intensive, integrated and interdisciplinary study of world history for teachers that will stress application to current issues and challenges in the global community, and

WHEREAS, by stressing interdisciplinary themes and concepts in world history and global studies, this program will contribute to a synergy of ideas and concepts across the university, and

WHEREAS, our innovative use of distance learning technology will allow for the internationalization of the graduate cohorts, and

WHEREAS, the Master of Arts in Social Studies in World History will engage local, national and global communities through education, and

WHEREAS, the consensus of educators and administrators consulted is that this program would be an innovative and outstanding contribution to improving the teaching of World History and related Global Studies courses, be it therefore

RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate recommends provisionally, for five years, the establishment of a new graduate program, entitled Master of Arts in Social Studies in World History effective June 1, 2013.

Resolution d is adopted unanimously

e. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Committee on Graduate Studies (Andrew Teplyakov, Chair) with the concurrence of the Coordinating Committee on Education (Deni Galileo, Chair) and the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) for the request to add a new degree MEd in Teacher Leadership (GRD0289) (attachment) (attachment) (resolution attachment) (budget attachment)

WHEREAS, the School of Education seeks to establish a program to prepare candidates for school-based leadership positions, and

WHEREAS, the focus of the Master of Education in Teacher Leadership is to prepare school teachers for leadership roles in their schools, districts and professional organizations, and

WHEREAS, the proposed M.Ed. program has been approved by the Graduate Curriculum Committees in the School of Education and the College of Education and Human Development, be it therefore

RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate recommends that this degree be approved provisionally for five years in the School of Education

Senator Morgan asked a question concerning the budget. He asks what the lump sum of allocated costs arise from? Is that the faculty plus graduate allocated costs under RBB? Dean Okagaki stated that it’s the graduate costs under RBB. The faculty are existing faculty, it doesn’t involve hiring new faculty.

Senator Galileo had a question on page 17 of the proposal and states that this could be a template of what Academic Partnerships role is. His question is about the daily data feeds from SIS. Senator Galileo is concerned that there is a clause that does not allow Academic Partnerships to mind our student information data.

Ralph Ferretti, Director, School of Education, stated that no contract has been signed and that the data is for Academic Partnerships to market the program. The General Counsel will help them with the contract so that they do not mind the data.

Senator Galileo warned them to be mindful that Academic Partnerships may use this to market our students for other programs that are not with UD.

Resolution e is adopted unanimously

f. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Committee on Graduate Studies (Andrew Teplyakov, Chair) with the concurrence of the Coordinating Committee on Education (Deni Galileo, Chair) and the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) for the request to add a dual degree MS-HBM and MBA (GRD 0280) (attachment) (attachment) (attachment) (attachment) (attachment)

WHEREAS, the Department of Hotel, Restaurant and Institutional Management (HRIM) in the Lerner College of Business and Economics has offered a successful program leading to an MS-Hospitality Business Management offering students a path towards pursuing careers in the hospitality industry with strong decision-making capabilities and analytical skills pertinent to the information age, and

WHEREAS, HRIM has received many inquiries over the last several years from individuals who are interested in a business oriented hospitality Master’s degree focused on analytical careers in the hospitality industry, but not in Hospitality Information Management, and

WHEREAS, HRIM has proposed a Dual MS-Hospitality Business Management and Master of Business Administration (Dual MS-HBM & MBA), which enables qualified students to develop stronger business fundamentals with greater functional depth in areas such as Accounting, Marketing, Finance, Strategy etc. to complement and apply in the experiential hospitality services domain, and

WHEREAS, the existing graduate program in HRIM and the other departments in the Lerner College of Business and Economics already provide a majority of all the courses and administrative framework for such a degree, and

WHEREAS, the proposed Master’s Degree contributes to one of the milestones on the University’s “path to prominence” to achieve excellence in professional education; be it therefore

RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate recommends provisional approval, for five years, the establishment of a new Dual Master of Science in Hospitality Business Management and Master of Business Administration (Dual MS-HBM & MBA)

Senator John Morgan calls a point of order to extend the meeting. Vote was taken and the meeting was extended. It was approved and the resolution was approved unanimously

g. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies (Fred Hofstetter, Chair) with the concurrence of the Coordinating Committee on Education ( Deni Galileo, Chair) and the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) for the request to add a new BS major in Actuarial Sciences (attachment) (attachment) (attachment) (attachment) (attachment) (attachment) (attachment) (attachment)

WHEREAS, the actuarial sciences offers a rigorous and rewarding career in the application of mathematics to risk management, and

WHEREAS, there is considerable interest among high quality prospective students and mathematics majors in our program in pursuing actuarial sciences as a career, and

WHEREAS, the creation of this program will create new and exciting opportunities for collaboration between students, faculty and employers in the insurance and financial sectors, and

WHEREAS, the Departments of Mathematical Sciences, Accounting and Management Information Systems, Applied Economics and Statistics have collaborated in designing this program, and

WHEREAS, this program does not require major additional resources in order to run successfully; be it therefore

RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate recommends that the BS major in Actuarial Sciences be granted provisional status for five years in the College of Arts and Sciences.

Resolution was approved unanimously

h. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Coordinating Committee on Education (Deni Galileo, Chair) and the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) for the request to revise the online education policy at UD (attachment 1 redline) (attachment resolution)

WHEREAS, the University of Delaware is committed to the use of innovative and online technologies to enhance and extend learning in undergraduate and graduate programs, both on and off campus; and

WHEREAS, it is increasingly clear that such innovative online techniques and courses can enhance learning for students on campus and extend learning to students at a distance; and

WHEREAS, the current policy in the Faculty Handbook on “distance learning,” which was drafted and recommended by the Faculty Senate Coordinating Committee on Education in 1993, clearly is outdated; and

WHEREAS, the Faculty Senate Coordinating Committee on Education has held two separate open hearings this academic year to consider potential changes to the existing Faculty Handbook policy; be it, therefore,

RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate approves the following new policy on the use of innovative technology and online course formats to replace the existing Faculty Handbook policy on the use of distance learning course formats.

Use of Innovative Technology and Online Course Formats

The University of Delaware is committed to the use of innovative and online technologies to enhance and extend learning in undergraduate and graduate programs, both on and off campus. The University has a long history of academic excellence founded on traditional classroom instruction, which should remain the educational standard on the Newark campus. It is increasingly clear, however, that innovative online techniques and courses can enhance learning for students on campus and extend learning to students at a distance. Therefore, online and other technologically enhanced and innovative methods of instruction are encouraged when appropriate for increasing

educational effectiveness.

For purposes that require it, the University defines ”online” course sections or programs as having 80% or more of their content delivered online, which follows an industry standard definition. It is recognized that most courses currently incorporate some lesser amount of content delivered online, either as an integral part or as supplementary, and are thus considered to be “web-facilitated,” blended,” or “hybrid.”

As with more traditional in-person courses and programs, the development of online courses and programs must be based on sound educational principles. It is up to the faculty member and their academic unit (e.g. department and/or college curriculum committees) to ensure the appropriate incorporation of effective online techniques. As are all courses and programs, online and hybrid courses and programs shall be reviewed and approved by the Faculty Senate if they have not been approved previously as in-person versions. Additionally, online course sections and programs shall be subject to the same periodic review and assessment by academic units as are in-person versions.

Student enrollment limits in online course sections shall be determined by the academic unit, as they are for in-person courses. Online course sections preferably will be taught by full-time University faculty to maintain educational quality and consistency.

Online course sections shall not be used to replace faculty, and faculty shall not be required to teach online course sections. On occasion, it may be desirable to employ entities outside of the university (i.e. third party contractors) to assist in facilitation of online programs. Faculty must maintain responsibility and control over online course content and assessment. The use of third party contractors shall be restricted to student recruitment and retention, program marketing, design and technology support, and similar activities. Third party contractors shall not be used for primary instruction or final assessment of student learning.

Senator John Morgan wanted to make amendments to this policy. The Parliamentarian stated that discussion should come first. A motion to amend was put on the floor by John Morgan. Senator Morgan stated that he is comfortable with most of the new provisions, but he wants stronger language in some places. He feels that students should not be forced into online course sections by requirements of degrees or by artificial enrollment limits. He has some wording he would like to propose to be inserted after the sentence “that faculty should not be forced to teach on line course sections” He proposes the following:

nor shall matriculated students be required by regulations or enrollment limits to enroll in an on-line course section unless they are pursuing an explicitly an online degree or the course is concerned with an online education.

Fred Hofstetter states that he’s not a senator, but he is a member of the Coordinating Committee. He finds this out of order and he feels we should not be making more amendments and that we should take it back to committee. He doesn’t feel that we should be amending these things on the floor.

Senator Galileo agrees with Fred, but he would rather have a vote if the Senate is happy with this and then if there is a change it could be done to the existing policy.

Senator Linda Gottfredson is uncomfortable with the students being able to opt out.

Vice President Kate Rogers had an amendment question and stated that the Senate shouldn’t be making the decision for every unit.

Senator Joerg Busch said he feels the amendment was complicated and too wordy. He stated it should be up to the department and feels that the senate can over regulate. It should remain general.

Senator Morgan responded to Senator Gottfredson’s point by saying that students can go online and take a course from another accredited university and then transfer it to this university. He said it’s a mistake to think it’s the same as traditional classroom education.

President Pollack asked if they could vote on the amendment. The amendment does not pass.

Senator John Morgan made another amendment as follows: “supplemental contract instructors and other temporary instructors shall be appointed to teach on-line course sections only if their appointments have been confirmed by a majority vote of the faculty in the department or school offering the course.”

President Pollack ruled it not germane to the resolution on the floor. He asked Senator Morgan to introduce that at the end of the meeting as new business and asked if the senate could now vote on the policy?

Senator John Jebb asked a question for the Parliamentarian… “Can the president call the question?”

President Pollack stated that the presiding officer can rule an amendment non germane according to Robert Rules of Order which means it is not relevant and changes the policy so fundamentally that it should be presented as a separate resolution. The resolution passes with three oppositions.

i. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Committee on Student Life (Mark Parcells, Chair) with the concurrence of the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) for the request to approve the 2013-2014 Student Life Resident Life Plans (attachment) (attachment) (resolution attachment)

WHEREAS, faculty review of any residential program involving students is a proper function of the University Faculty Senate, and

WHEREAS, the Student Life Committee of the Faculty Senate, and the Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate have reviewed and recommend approval of the residential program proposed by the Office of Residence Life for the academic year 2013-2014, be it therefore

RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate of the University of Delaware has reviewed and recommends for approval of the attached Office of Residence Life residential program for 2013-2014

The resolution passes unanimously

i. Recommendation from the Faculty Senate Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) with the concurrence of the Coordinating Committee on Education (Deni Galileo, Chair) and the Rules Committee (Anu Sivaraman, Chair) for the approval of a resolution concerning review of the Academic Calendar (attachment)

WHEREAS, the Registrar and the senior administration of the University of Delaware approve the academic calendars for the University several years in advance; and

WHEREAS, the Faculty Senate reviews such academic calendars that are approved by the Registrar and the senior administration; and

WHEREAS, there is no current procedure for such review by the Faculty Senate, nor is there a committee with express jurisdiction to conduct such review; and

WHEREAS, the Coordinating Committee on Education has broad representation of faculty and considerable experience with academic issues, and thus is the most appropriate standing committee to review the academic calendars on behalf of the Faculty Senate; be it therefore

RESOLVED, that the rules and procedures of the Faculty Senate shall be amended to provide that the academic calendars that are approved by the Registrar and the senior administration shall be submitted to the Coordinating Committee on Education for review, and thereafter, submitted to the Faculty Senate by the Coordinating Committee on Education as a point of information.

New Rule and Procedure of the Faculty Senate:

The Coordinating Committee on Education shall be charged with the duty of reviewing those academic calendars that are approved from time to time by the Registrar and senior administration of the University. The Committee shall inform the Faculty Senate as a point of information of such approved and reviewed academic calendars at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Senate.

Resolution passes unanimously

k. Recommendation from the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) with the concurrence of the Promotion and Tenure Committee (Tom Kaminski, Chair) for the revision to the Faculty Handbook section 4.4.11regarding Promotion and Tenure “Changes in Departmental Priorities”

(attachment 1) (attachment)

WHEREAS, Section 4.4.11 (“Changes in Departmental Priorities”) of the Faculty Handbook of the University of Delaware provides that for the promotion and/or tenure decision during the probationary period, faculty have the right to be reviewed under the policy and procedure in effect at the time of their hiring, rather than under any revised policy or procedure subsequently adopted; and

WHEREAS, while not expressly stated, the implication of the language in Section 4.4.11 as well as past practice at the University is that faculty coming up for a promotion subsequent to the promotion and/or tenure decision during the probationary period will be reviewed under the policy and procedure in effect at the time they declare their candidacy; and

WHEREAS, there has been at least one case wherein a candidate for promotion subsequent to that during the probationary period has claimed the right to be reviewed under the policy and procedure in effect at the time of their hiring; and

WHEREAS, it is important to clarify that this right to elect to be reviewed under the policy and procedure in effect at the time of the candidate’s hiring is only available to candidates coming up for promotion and/or tenure during the probationary period; be it therefore

RESOLVED, that the Faculty Handbook shall be amended to expressly state that faculty coming up for a promotion subsequent to the promotion and/or tenure decision during the probationary period shall be reviewed under the policy and procedure in effect at the time they declare their candidacy for such promotion

Discussions revolved around questions about work-load. President Pollack explains the policy about coming up for promotion under current guidelines.

Senator Buell stated that the workload should be consistent with your ability to stand for promotion. If standards have changed over time then your workload would change by default. It should cause a gradual shifting in whatever the workload is she stated.

Senator Morgan stated that the policy should be included in the hiring letter. He suggested that this is a hard question to ask today and that we should not consider this in the next seven minutes.

Senator Steve Hastings was concerned about the resolution. He’s concerned that a faculty member could be chasing their tale if the rules continue to change.

President Pollack stated that we are just clarifying the policy not changing it.

Provost Brickhouse stated that we need to be able to move with the times and that the policy here is clear and consistent. She doesn’t feel that the Faculty Handbook should dictate what is put in a letter of hire.

Senator Morgan wanted to know what is the policy about this at some of our peer institutions, and wants to wait to vote until the next meeting.

Provost Brickhouse pointed out that passing this changes nothing. It just clarifies the current policy.

Ralph Ferretti stated that they should have an accomplished national recognition.

Senator Ali Poorani stated that workload is relevant. He said that if someone is providing service why it could not be equal to research.

President Pollack reiterates that this does not change the policy, but rather just clarifies it.

Senator Jason Mycoff called the question.

Resolution passes.

The following resolutions with the exception of resolution p, which was approved at the beginning of the meeting, will be considered at the April 29^th special meeting of the Faculty Senate since time did not permit to consider them today.

l. Recommendation from the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) with the concurrence of the Promotion and Tenure Committee (Tom Kaminski, Chair) for the revision to the Faculty Handbook section 4.4.4 regarding Promotion and Tenure “Departmental Responsibilities” (attachment 1) (attachment)

WHEREAS, Section 4.4.4 (“Departmental

Responsibilities”) of the Faculty Handbook of the University of Delaware provides that department promotion and tenure committees “should” include a separate document identifying the specific external reviewers who were nominated by the candidate versus those nominated by the department committee; and

WHEREAS, department committees at times do not follow such recommendation to include such a document in the dossiers of candidates identifying which party selected the external reviewers whose letters are included in the dossier; and

WHEREAS, it is important that members of college and University promotion and tenure committees as well as deans and the provost be provided with such information in order to make informed decisions with respect to the candidate’s case for promotion and/or tenure; be it therefore

RESOLVED, that Section 4.4.4 of the Faculty Handbook shall be amended to require that a separate document identifying the specific external reviewers who were nominated by the candidate versus those nominated by the department be included by the department promotion and tenure committee in the candidate’s dossier.

m. Recommendation from the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) with the concurrence of the Promotion and Tenure Committee (Tom Kaminski, Chair) for the revision to the Faculty Handbook section 4.1.2 regarding Promotion and Tenure “Secondary, Joint, Adjunct, And Visiting Faculty Appointments” (attachment 1) (attachment)

WHEREAS, Section 4.1.2 (“Secondary, Joint, Adjunct, and Visiting Faculty Appointments”) of the Faculty Handbook of the University of Delaware uses the title “adjunct faculty” to apply to those “members of the academic staff who are appointed for a limited period of time during the year(s) in which they are actively involved in the teaching and research program of the University,” are paid no stipend, and whose appointments “are annual only;” and

WHEREAS, such use of the title “adjunct faculty” is unique to the University and does not conform with that of most other universities, who generally apply the title “adjunct faculty” to part-time faculty who teach courses on short-term contracts; and

WHEREAS, to avoid confusion and bring the University’s usage of the title “adjunct faculty” in conformance with common usage in the academic world as well as common practice at the University itself; be it therefore

RESOLVED, that Section 4.1.2 of the Faculty Handbook shall be amended to provide that the title “adjunct faculty” be given to those persons who teach a course or courses on a supplemental contract and who are not otherwise fulltime faculty of the University, and at the same time, those faculty who are presently given the title “adjunct faculty” shall henceforth be given the title “affiliated faculty” (Professor, Associate Professor, Assistant Professor, or Instructor).

n. Recommendation from the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) with the concurrence of the Promotion and Tenure Committee (Tom Kaminski, Chair) for the revision to the Faculty Handbook section 4.4.4 regarding Promotion and Tenure “Departmental Responsibilities” (attachment 1) (attachment)

WHEREAS, Section 4.4.4 (“Departmental Responsibilities”) of the Faculty Handbook of the University of Delaware provides that untenured faculty may serve on department promotion and tenure committees; and

WHEREAS, the same provision provides that a minority of the faculty serving on a department promotion and tenure committee may be junior faculty who are “below rank” to the candidate; and

WHEREAS, it is important that all members of departmental promotion and tenure committees hold tenure in decisions that involve the granting of tenure and that all members of the committee be at or above rank to the position for which the candidate is applying because faculty who do not hold tenure and/or who are “below rank” to the candidate lack the necessary experience and qualifications to make informed decisions regarding the merits of the candidate’s case; be it therefore

RESOLVED, that Section 4.4.4 of the Handbook shall be amended to provide that participation on department promotion and tenure committees shall be limited to those faculty who are at or above rank to the position for which the candidate is applying, and in decisions that involve the granting of tenure, limited to those faculty who hold tenure.

o. Recommendation from the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) with the concurrence of the Promotion and Tenure Committee (Tom Kaminski, Chair) for the revision to the Faculty Handbook section 4.1.1 regarding Promotion and Tenure “Faculty Appointment Policy” (attachment 1) (attachment)

WHEREAS, Section 4.1.1 of the Faculty Handbook (“Faculty Appointment Policy”) of the University of Delaware provides that the faculty in a department must approve any faculty “appointment” to the department; and

WHEREAS, Section 4.1.1 further provides that the academic rank of the new faculty member must be approved by the Provost, and appointments with tenure must be approved by the Provost and President; and

WHEREAS, there is no express provision for faculty participation in the decisions as to the academic rank or whether tenure will be granted in the case of such an appointment; and

WHEREAS, it is important that faculty who are at or above rank to the candidate approve the academic rank of such an appointee and faculty with tenure approve the granting of tenure to such an appointee; and

WHEREAS, it is important that the faculty and administrators who are making such decisions have sufficient information to make an informed decision with respect to the appropriate rank of such appointee, and where relevant, whether tenure should be granted; be it therefore

RESOLVED, that Section 4.1.1 of the Faculty Handbook shall be amended to provide that the academic rank of a faculty appointment must be approved by department faculty who are at or above the proposed rank of the candidate, and that in the case of appointments with tenure, department faculty with tenure must approve the granting of tenure to such candidate; and be it further

RESOLVED, that Section 4.1.1 of the Faculty Handbook shall be amended to provide that departments shall set forth requirements in their promotion and tenure documents describing what materials (including external letters of review) substantiating excellence in scholarship and/or teaching must be provided by a candidate for a faculty appointment in that department at a rank higher than their rank in their current academic position and for any faculty appointment that includes the granting of tenure to a candidate who does not already have tenure in their current academic position.

p. Recommendation from the Committee on Undergraduate Studies (Fred Hofstetter, Chair) with the concurrence of the Coordinating Committee on Education (Deni Galileo, Chair) and the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) for the approval of a policy revision to section 3.1.4 Examinations and Tests (attachment 1)

WHEREAS, the policy for permitting common exams to be held out of the normal class meeting time and at specific approved times has been in effect for many years, and

WHEREAS, currently common out of class examinations are permitted from 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m., Wednesday thru Friday and Saturday from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., and

WHEREAS, due to the increasing numbers of students who are enrolled in courses requiring common out of class examinations, additional time to give common examinations needs to be made available, and

WHEREAS, to minimize time conflicts with other courses and activities, it is recommended that Monday from 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. and Tuesday from 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. be added as permissible time periods to schedule common exams, be it therefore

RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate recommends that the Faculty Handbook Section 3.1.4 Examinations and Tests be revised, as in attachment 1above, to add Monday and Tuesday from 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. as permissible time periods to schedule common exams.

Resolution p is adopted unanimously.

VII. Introduction of New Business

Such items as may come before the Senate. (No motion introduced under new business, except a motion to refer to committee, shall be acted upon until the next meeting of the Senate.)

Introduction of new business:

Senator Martha Buell introduced a motion to lengthen the challenge period. It’s too short as is she feels.

Past Senate President Jeff Jordan introduced the following resolution:

Whereas, The Constitution of the Faculty of the University of Delaware stipulates that “No motion introduced under new business, except a motion to refer to committee, shall be acted upon until the next meeting of the Senate.” (Section IV.9) and

Whereas, reviews by committees of proposed motions are important to the working of the Senate; be it therefore

Resolved, that, for any motion introduced under New Business, the Executive Committee shall determine the initial committee to review the motion, unless the senate votes to refer the motion to a particular committee, or to not refer the motion to a committee.

Senator Morgan introduced the following resolution:

WHEREAS, the Faculty Handbook and the bylaws and promotion and tenure documents of departments and schools contain extensive provisions for the appointment and reappointment of tenured, tenure-track, and continuing non-tenure track faculty and for the periodic review of the teaching done by them, but currently many departments and schools lack written policies for the appointment and reappointment of Supplemental Contract instructors and other temporary faculty who may be repeatedly reappointed, or for the periodic review of the teaching done by them, be it

RESOLVED, that by June 1, 2014, each department or school must have a written policy, approved by a majority of its full-time voting faculty and by the University Faculty Senate's Coordinating Committee on Education, which describes its procedures for appointing and reappointing Supplemental Contract instructors and other temporary faculty. The procedures for reappointment must include provisions for periodic review by a committee composed of full-time voting faculty, at least as often as every third year, of a dossier of teaching materials, such as syllabi, homework assignments, quizzes, examinations, termpapers, projects, and other materials used in the grading of the students, as well as the grade distributions in the courses and the comments made by the students.

Motion to adjourn was adopted and the meeting was adjourned at 6:06 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted,

Karren Helsel-Spry