Minutes
Faculty Senate Meeting
December 1, 2004
David Rosenbloom called the meeting to order at 1:45 p.m.
Present: Professors Ahrens, Arneson, Bennett, Burke, Douglass, Durant, Fantie, Flug, Heintze,
Jacoby, Karch, King, La Salle, Leap, Loesberg, Mardirosian, Petit, Richardson, Riley,
Rosenbloom, Schaeff, Streitmatter, Vogelsong,Weaver. Provost Kerwin and Dean of Academic
Affairs Broder.
The minutes of the November 3, 2004 meeting were approved.
Professor Rosenbloom welcomed Mike Petit, Washington College of Law Library, as a new
member of the Senate. Professor Petit is replacing Wendell Cochran as chair of the Committee
on Student Learning and Academic Engagement.
Report of the Provost
Neil Kerwin reported that the Board of Trustees had approved a set of formulation guidelines
that were fully consistent with the recommendations made by the Senate. The Board approved
tuition increases ranging from 4.5 to 6.5 percent. The Board also committed to maintaining the
current policy of increasing undergraduate and graduate financial aid at the same rate that AU
increases its tuition.
Dr. Kerwin underscored the following with respect to the Board’s discussion about the budget
for fiscal years 2006 and 2007.
• The Board has made a commitment to maintain progress on all of the academic elements of the
15-point plan. Those elements include faculty size, reduction of adjunct faculty—with a
concomitant increase of in-residence adjunct faculty—and undergraduate and graduate program
quality.
• The commitment to the library will continue. The level of commitment will be determined in
the detailed budget deliberations.
• The base funding for technology replacement is firm, so that all faculty can expect periodic
replacement of hardware on a three-year funding cycle.
• The facilities issues the Senate has raised will be part of a broader facilities effort.
Dr. Kerwin also noted that the freshman class would indeed grow slightly. The projected
freshman class for the next two fiscal years is 1275, with an incoming transfer class of
approximately 375. The graduate programs are not slated to grow dramatically, but AU is
committed to maintaining the same trajectory with regard to quality. Therefore, consistent with
the Senate’s recommendation, Provost Kerwin said he will continue to seek at least marginal
increases in financial aid to ensure that the graduate programs remain as competitive as possible.
National Survey of Student Engagement
Provost Kerwin asked that Karen Froslid-Jones, director of Institutional Research and
Assessment, comment on the “Institutional Benchmark Report” from the National Survey of
Student Engagement. That report presents American’s benchmark scores and compares AU’s
scores to the doctoral extensive institutions. AU’s scores are also compared to the NSSE national
norms.
Ms. Froslid-Jones indicated first that NSSE had created several clusters, or benchmarks, to assess
the extent to which undergraduate students are engaged in good educational practices. She said
the clusters were:
• Level of academic challenge
• Active and collaborative learning
• Student-faculty interactions
• Enriching educational experiences
• Supportive campus environment
She also noted that 162,000 students from 472 four-year colleges and universities across the
country had participated in the survey in 2004. Forty-two of the institutions are classified as
doctoral extensive. Continuing, she said the scores for American University were quite
impressive, with the following results for seniors in doctoral extensive institutions:
• the top score for level of academic challenge;
• the top score for student-faculty interactions;
• the top score for enriching educational experiences.
American also placed in the 80th percentile for active and collaborative learning for seniors and
had the top score for enriching educational experiences for freshman. It is quite encouraging, she
concluded, to know that the university’s students are having so many positive educational
experiences. A copy of the benchmark report is appended to the record copy of the minutes.
Dr. Kerwin said the NSSE results would be made available to the Office of Enrollment to ensure
they are highlighted in the materials that go out to prospective students.
Academic Calendar
Dr. Kerwin announced that the academic calendar for AY 2005-2006 would remain the same as
the current year’s calendar, with no elimination of the Fall Break. He said he had received a
number of proposals for altering the calendar, as a result of the solicitation of opinion. Those
proposals will be referred to the leadership of the Senate, with a request for a review by the
appropriate committees, including the Committee on Student Learning and Academic
Engagement.
University College
Dr. Kerwin reported that a group of faculty, convened by Tony Ahrens, College of Arts and
Sciences, had participated in a full day’s workshop to consider refining the proposals that were
put forward by the University College Project Team. The faculty who attended the workshop
were Joe Campbell and John Douglass from the School of Communication; Christine Chin and
Gary Weaver from the School of International Service; Kathy Getz and Richard Linowes from
Kogod School of Business; Steve Taylor and Rob Johnson from the School of Public Affairs;
and Eileen Findlay, John Hyman, Theresa Larkin, and Cathy Schaeff, from the College of Arts
and Sciences. Diana Vogelsong represented the University Library, and Sharon Alston and Susan
Hertz represented the Office of Enrollment. There was also a strong contingent from Campus
Life, including Marcy Campos, Faith Leonard, Tiffany Sanchez, and Rick Treter.
Dr. Kerwin said he thought the group had a positive reaction to the prospects of a freshman
seminar, fully supported and integrated into the campus life experience. He noted that as the next
step in the process, he would call on six or seven members of the faculty to develop course
outlines for a pilot program that will be offered in Fall 2005. Eighteen students will participate in
each section of the pilot. Most, if not all, of the seminars will be taught in the residence halls.
Enrollment Update
Dr. Kerwin provided the following information on the enrollments for the fall semester.
• The applications for the freshman class were up 13 percent over the same time last year.
• The early decision process was in full swing, with the expectation that roughly 200 students
will accept admission for that component of the class.
• The transfer numbers were down slightly, although the number was not significant.
• The masters applications were down 10 percent university-wide.
• The applications for the doctoral programs were up over last year at the same time.
Kogod School’s Dean’s Search
The search for a new dean of the Kogod School of Business was proceeding as planned. The
timeline for the search remained firm, and the review of credentials by the search committee was
to begin soon.
Advisement Project Team
Dr. Kerwin also reported that the Advisement Project Team had issued its final report. That
report had been posted on the provost’s web site and had also been referred to the Committee on
Curriculum and Academic Programs for consideration. Two major recommendations emerged
from the project team’s deliberations: (1) the need for some ongoing structure to ensure that
advisors have a venue to regularly review changes that are of importance; and (2) the need to
improve the collection of information from faculty about interactions with students that broadly
defined would be considered advising.
Academic Regulations
As a final point, Provost Kerwin said that he had sent an e-mail to the co-chairs of the
Curriculum Committee about graduate financial aid regulations that need to be updated, in light
of policy changes made last year. Other changes to the academic regulations are in various stages
of consideration and development. Dr. Kerwin will report back to the Senate on the proposed
revisions in due course.
Report on Campus Life
Gail Hanson, Vice President of Campus Life, began by highlighting what she called “late
breaking developments,” aspects of campus life that she said are capturing attention in the
student media or in other places. She noted the following:
• The Office of Campus Life now captures nearly the entire entering class at New Student
Orientation. This year students reacted positively to a new session on academic life at AU, where
96 percent of those participating said they became more familiar with academic services,
resources, and transition issues. The session was led by John Hyman, Department of Literature.
• As an experiment this year, Joe Campbell, a faculty member in the SOC, moved his office to
McDowell Hall. He appears to be enjoying himself, and the students like having him there. As a
professor of journalism, he is making a special effort to use the USA Today readership program.
• The Office of Multicultural Affairs has launched a new mentorship program called L.I.F.T.—
Leaders who Inspire and Foster Positive Transitions. This program ties into a major goal for
Campus Life this year: an emphasis on the recruitment and retention of students of color.
• Campus Life has established a late night recreation center in Letts Hall. The center has a large
screen TV, video games, pool tables, and air hockey—it is a place where students can take a
study break and engage in constructive activities. Some version of the center may be replicated
on the north side of campus.
• Marcy Campos has been named as the new director in the Community Service Center. A
former instructor in the School of Education, she knows the campus well and is dedicated to
service learning.
• The University Scheduling Office is using an automated system to meet the challenge of
providing space for approximately 7,000 meetings and events on campus in the course of the
year. A list of confirmed events may be accessed on the my.american.edu portal.
• A new film on civility in the classroom will debut at the Ann Ferren Teaching Conference in
January. The film grew out of last year’s civility project.
• The strategy developed last year to support international students in the absence of the English
Language Institute is working well. The utilization of services in the Literature department and
also in the Writing Lab indicates that the students are taking advantage of the support system and
are performing well.
Vice President Hanson then commented on highlights from a handout that she distributed, which
emphasized critical aspects of the work of the Office of Student Life, including data on the
volume of traffic in some of the program and service areas. A copy of that handout is appended
the record copy of the minutes.
As a third part of her report, she discussed with the Senate what she said were critical issues, the
use and abuse of alcohol or drugs on campus and difficulties in the mental health area. She said
the Office of Campus Life had responded to the issue of alcohol and drug use with targeted
interventions:
• The student orientation now includes two sessions about alcohol and drug use. The sessions
emphasize the university’s expectations and the consequences if students are caught in violating
those expectations.
• The students have developed an awareness campaign called THINK.
• The Office of Campus Life now contacts parents when a student has a violation involving a
significantly egregious use of drugs or a repeat violation involving alcohol.
• The Counseling Center conducts “Heads Up” classes led by an alcohol/drug counselor. Eightytwo students were involved in the class last year.
• The Counseling Center referred 112 students for individual assessment last year. Thirty-four
were ultimately seen by an alcohol/drug counselor.
• The students have access to confidential self assessments online.
• An Alcoholics Anonymous program for students was established on campus last year.
With regard to the mental health area, Vice President Hanson noted a recent emphasis in the
media about suicide on college or university campuses. She said a story in the The New York
Times had disclosed that nearly half of all students feel so depressed that they have trouble
functioning. The article also stated that a quarter of the students seen at university counseling
centers are taking psychiatric medications. Those facts are certainly evident at AU, Vice
President Hanson noted, which is why Campus Life has increasingly expanded the number of
hours the psychiatrist at Student Health is available.
In any given year, Vice President Hanson continued, 849 students are in individual counseling in
the Counseling Center, and another 100 students who are appropriate for on-campus counseling
are referred out. In addition, a not insubstantial number, whose conditions are too serious and too
long term to be engaged in university counseling are referred to mental health providers off
campus. The Counseling Center has also tested its services against a 12-point checklist that was
part of a report issued by the National Mental Health Association, and the university’s services,
which include screening programs, access to educational materials for parents and families,
access to appropriately trained providers and medical services, and stress reduction programs,
were found to be more than satisfactory.
Recommendations of the Committee on Curriculum and Academic Programs
University Honors
Cathy Schaeff, co chair of the Curriculum Committee, introduced a motion to increase the
graduation requirement for University Honors from 3.3 to 3.5. She drew attention to a
memorandum from Michael Mass, Director of the University Honors Program, in which he
noted two reasons for the change:
1. The requirements have not been changed in at least 10 years, and the distribution of grades at
AU has changed over this period. The average GPA is currently somewhere between 3.1 and 3.2
2. Since the minimum for Latin Honors is 3.5, it seems logical that the University Honors should
have a similar requirement.
Professor Schaeff noted that the effective application date would be for the class of 2009.
Action: The Faculty Senate voted unanimously to approve the motion to increase the graduation
requirement for University Honors from a GPA of 3.3 to 3.5. (The proposed change affects
academic regulation 25.10.00, Section 13, B, 2, b.)
Grade Inflation
Professor Schaeff then introduced a recommendation from the Curriculum Committee regarding
grade inflation. She said the evidence suggests that grade inflation is alive and well at AU. The
question is are the faculty concerned about it, and do they want to take any particular action to
stop it? She also noted that the committee was taking a slightly different perspective on the issue
by asking the following questions: Are we inadvertently penalizing faculty who maintain fairly
strict rules about how grades are distributed in their class—and who may have lower SETs
because of that? Is that unfair and does it need to be addressed in any way?
She said the Curriculum Committee therefore was presenting the following recommendation:
Recommendation: We recommend that Deans and Unit Heads require that any assessment of
faculty teaching based on SETs include a review of course grade distributions. These data are
easily available to administrators from Eagledata (www.American.edu/eagledata; under general
links go to grade distribution, then go to department and grade distribution and put in the
department and term and it will provide the grade distribution for each class offered).
In response to a question from Gary Weaver, School of International Service, Dean Broder
clarified that there is currently some review of student evaluations of teaching, with a concurrent
review of grade distribution, although not on a required basis and not in all cases. She also
suggested that the Curriculum Committee’s proposal be referred to the Committee on Faculty
Relations for consideration, since the latter committee reviews policy changes.
During the discussion, the members of the Senate expressed support for the committee’s
motivation to increase awareness about grade inflation by using the sunshine solution. There was
also support for the goals of improving teaching and making sure there is clear evaluation of
faculty. The responses to the recommendation, however, were diverse. Excerpts of some of the
comments follow:
• The use of grade distribution on a case-by-case basis is potentially dangerous. It is important
that such use be systematic and routine, rather than selective.
• The relationship between SETs and grade distribution data is very complicated, but a review of
grade distribution may be a piece of additional information that might prove useful.
• Whatever we do, the SETs and the grade distribution information need to be used merely as
tools. There ought to be a mechanism whereby a faculty member has narrative input into why the
numbers are what they are, especially if the numbers are skewed in some way that could be
looked at with a jaundiced eye by the administration.
• There are other things needed in order to evaluate what a professor is doing. Sometimes it is the
case that a professor gets a class of very good students. In that case, it would make sense to have
the average GPA of the students in the class, plus the average GPA given by that professor in all
of his or her classes.
• This is a very complex thing and you need to know when you’re looking at a measure what
you’re really looking at…We’re looking at things that are loosely correlated, and we’re
confusing, particularly with this proposal, hypotheses with evidence. There is some evidence that
high grades are associated with high teaching evaluations. But high learning and good teachers
are also associated with high teaching evaluations….We need to measure learning. If we want to
evaluate teaching, we have to have objective measures of what students are learning.
• The evaluation of teaching really begins with the construction of a curriculum. The answer may
be found in the effort that is underway with regard to learning objectives. The central issue is
whether the faculty is prepared to take collective responsibility not just for a curriculum, but for
the evaluation of colleagues.
Actions: The Senate voted on the committee’s motion to have the deans and unit heads require
that any assessment of faculty teaching based on SETs include a review of course grade
distributions. The outcome was a tie. The motion therefore did not pass.
John Douglass then introduced a motion for the Senate to refer the proposal to the Committee on
Faculty Relations for further consideration. That motion passed by a unanimous vote.
Debriefing on the Free Lunch
Bob Karch, chair of the Committee on Faculty Development, gave a report on the Open Faculty
Forum that was held on November 10 in McDowell Formal Lounge. He said the forum was
hosted by the Faculty Development Committee. Representatives from the Instructional Budget
and Benefit Committee, the Summer 2005 Working Group, and the Four-Course Load
Committee also attended.
Noting that the forum was designed to address a number of critical issues raised by the faculty,
Professor Karch said the representatives from the committees shared information about the work
that was underway, as well as gathered information on the discussions that took place. Thirtytwo faculty were in attendance, representing all the schools and colleges.
He then briefly described the list of discussion topics and spoke about some of the observations.
The copy of the document he distributed to the Senate is appended to the record copy of the
minutes. Most notably, he said, the four-course load remains a primary concern. He said the
group also exchanged ideas about the need to expand and support research opportunities and
about incentives for developing funding/contract opportunities. There also appears to be a need
to enhance communication among the senators and their colleagues, to ensure that all members
of the faculty have a voice.
For the Good of the Order
John Richardson, director of the Center for Teaching Excellence, announced that the Ann Ferren
Teaching Conference would be held on Friday, January 7, 2005, at 11:30 a.m.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:10 p.m.