Graduate Council Meeting Minutes 3/21/12
GBB 202, 12:10-1:00 p.m.
Members Present: R. Arouca, A. Borgmann, D. Campbell, D. Erickson, J. Hodgin, J.
Hunt, M. Mayer, C. Palmer, L. Stanhope, K. Swift
Members Absent/Excused: R. Judd, K. Wu
Ex-officio members Present: S. Sprang, S. Ross
The meeting was called to order by Chair Palmer at 12:10 p.m.
The 3/7/12 minutes were approved.
Communication Items

The Bertha Morton Deadline in this Friday, March 23rd. It is hoped that materials
will be posted on Moodle Monday. Camie will send a confirmation message to
members. There will not be a Council meeting next week to allow members to
review the materials and subcommittees to organize. Chair Palmer responded to a
concern from DBS regarding the change in the number of nominations.

The Geosciences program review materials are available. The Science subcommittee
should complete the review by the end of the semester.

The Academic Curriculum Review Committee is looking to redesign the curriculum
forms to be completely electronic. Graduate Council is supportive of electronic
forms/ signatures.

The Systems Ecology proposal approved fall 2010 is now planning to offer one of the
courses fall 2012, but never submitted a course form (Fundamentals of Ecosystem
Ecology). The program sent a copy of the proposal which included course forms but
this was not the copy archived from the review. The program was advised to offer the
course with an experimental number.
Business Items

Five course forms were submitted in response to the co-convening letter (4 in
Journalism and 1 in Computer Science). The subcommittees will review these for
approval this spring.

The Council reviewed the Individualized Interdisciplinary PhD (IIP) program student
status report. There are 16 active students. It was noted that there was an error in the
Banner report which did not include Ann Cook. She was on the previous report and
is now teaching in Psychology. There is currently no reporting method to assure
students are making progress. Chair Palmer will contact the students to find out how
many credits have been completed beyond the masters’ degree, whether they have
submitted a prospectus, and whether their defense has been scheduled. The
Oversight Committee should have access to the curriculum plan with mile stones to
verify that progress has been made. The Graduate School and the Oversight
Committee should be formally notified of students’ passing the qualifying exam.
Procedures /forms will be completed once the director is hired. The Graduate School
is currently working on completing the job description in preparation for the
recruitment.

Associate Dean Ross revised the policies. These will be sent to the Council to
review. It is important to note the date of substantive changes.
The meeting was adjourned at 1:00 PM.
32 Campus Drive, University Hall 221
Missoula, MT 59812
March 7, 2012
Graduate Council Review
Proposal to create a Masters in Nonprofit Management
The Graduate Council has reviewed and discussed the Level II proposal to
establish a new Masters of Nonprofit Management degree program at some
length. Proposal authors Jon Tompkins and Andrea Vernon visited with the
Council on two occasions to present the proposal and answer questions. The
Council has also reviewed information provided by the Masters of Business
Administration committee and the Executive Director of the Montana Nonprofit
Association.
The Council is convinced that there is a need for a master’s degree program in
nonprofit management, administration or leadership. The Level II proposal
provides convincing documentation of this need, which is evidenced by the lack
of any such programs in the region, the waiting list of students who would like
to enroll in the program, and the support of the Montana Nonprofit Association.
This demonstrated need outlined in the proposal has generated significant
enthusiasm for the proposed program, and ultimately, the Council would like to
support its creation.
The Council is responsible for evaluating and ensuring the academic quality of
proposed programs. It is in this regard that some significant concerns with the
proposal remain. Many of these concerns are related to the lack of presently
available resources committed to the program. Although these concerns are
significant, the Council believes that remedies might exist that would facilitate
eventual approval of the proposal. For example, insufficient resources might be
addressed either through committing new resources to the program or through
making better use of resources already available on campus.
In summary, despite the documented need for the Master’s in Nonprofit
Management and the substantial enthusiasm among Graduate Council in
support of the program, the Council can not recommend the program for
approval in its current form. Specific concerns and issues that the Council feels
need to be addressed before the proposal can be recommended are:
- The proposed program consists of 34 credits and a final Portfolio. It is
unclear whether the Portfolio serves as a Thesis or Professional Paper to
be evaluated through examination by a committee of faculty and
submitted as an Electronic Thesis, Dissertation or Professional Paper
(ETDP).
o If the Portfolio is intended to serve as a Thesis or Professional Paper
(exhibiting such substance and quality as to warrant eventual
publication or exhibition), then the proposal needs to specify that a
defense and examination is required and indicate what faculty will
serve on the examination committees.
o If the Portfolio is not to be evaluated through examination, and the
degree is to be a non-thesis degree, then the total number of credits
for the program is insufficient and would need to be increased to
36.
o If the Portfolio is not to be evaluated through examination then the
proposal needs to more clearly define by whom, how, and by what
criteria the Portfolio will be used to provide a comprehensive
evaluation over the content of the discipline.
-
-
The proposed program does not include a sufficient number of qualified
tenure-line faculty to ensure quality instruction, advising, assessment and
long-term viability. Rather, the proposal suggests that one or more faculty
will be hired after the program has been initiated, and that the program
will ultimately be terminated if new faculty are not hired. The Council
(and indeed the authors of the proposal) remains concerned that a high
quality academic program can not be initiated or sustained without
sufficient tenure-line faculty resources or expertise. We believe that this
issue could be addressed in several ways, including the hiring of new
faculty with the necessary expertise to develop and administrate the
program or by taking advantage of faculty expertise already available on
campus. Increased involvement of tenure-line Political Science faculty
with demonstrated expertise in the area of nonprofit management would
represent one way to anchor the program with existing available
resources. The relevant expertise of the Political Science faculty who are
now listed as program contributors (i.e., Koehn, Greene, Lopach) could be
articulated, their roles could be expanded to include advising
responsibilities, and their roles in the capstone Portfolio project could be
articulated more clearly. Other potential approaches include recruitment
of qualified faculty from other units at UM and clear articulation of what
these persons roles and contributions to the program would be.
It is not clear from the proposal whether students will have an advisory
committee of faculty or how they will be advised regarding coursework,
the Portfolio, and/or internship opportunities and expectations. Given
that the degree content will be delivered entirely online, and that students
will be involved in internships at off-campus locations, the Council feels
that it is imperative that students be advised and evaluated by an
advisory committee of qualified faculty. Again, Graduate Council believes
that the potential exists for this advisory body to comprise new faculty as
well as existing tenure-line faculty members at the University of Montana.
o Considering the 4-credit Internship (PSCI 598) experience
specifically, Dr. Vernon commented to Graduate Council that
students’ Internship performances would be evaluated. As written,
the proposal directs questions about PSCI 598 to UM’s Office of
Civic Engagement. Additional information about the experience,
including the faculty members who are responsible for it and the
guidelines/rubrics for student performance evaluation, is needed.
Procedure Number:
Procedure:
303.40
WAGS/ UMI Award Nominations
Date Adopted:
4/29/09
Last Revision:
Reference:
Approved by:
SRS, 3/7/12
WAGS/UMI Call for Nomiantions
Graduate Council
The Western Association of Graduate Schools (WAGS) and University Microfilms
International (UMI) offer two awards (Distinguished master’s Thesis Award and the
Innovation in Technology Award) each year.
The call for nomination, published by WAGS in late April of each year, includes
eligibility requirements and guidelines. The University may forward one
nomination per award. The University’s Nomination must be submitted to WAGS
by late August. Students eligible for the award will have received their Masters
degree within the period of July 1 of the previous academic year and June 30 of the
current academic year.
The Graduate School sends out the call for nominations, and application materials to
Graduate Program Directors. Each graduate program may select one graduate
student for consideration for nomination by the Graduate School. Applications must
be received, as electronic documents, by the Graduate School on or before the
Monday of the second week in July.
Applications will be reviewed by Associate Provost for Graduate Education and the
Associate Dean of the Graduate School, who may draw on appropriate expertise if
available, to select a candidate for nomination to WAGS/UMI.
Nomination materials supplied by the Associate Provost for Graduate Education to
WAGS will include:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
An original plus eight copies of the written nomination letter from the
Graduate Dean cited in the Eligibility Requirements above. The letter
should describe the process that was used to select the thesis for
nomination.
An original plus eight copies of a non-technical summary prepared by
the student (1000-1500 words) describing the research and its
significance for a general academic audience of non-specialists.
An original plus eight copies of the table of contents for the nominated
thesis.
An original plus eight copies of the letter from the department head or
major professor and one additional faculty member. The letters should
include information regarding the significance of the thesis, the
contribution of the thesis to the program of the degree granting unit,
and the impact of the thesis on the knowledge base of the discipline.
A CV or resume from the student nominee
Applications shall be evaluated according to the following criteria:
f.
g.
h.
i.
Originality
Significance of the study
Overall quality
Outcomes and accomplishments from the thesis