44th Faculty Senate
April 1, 2010 – 3:30p.m.
Robert C. Voight Faculty Senate Chambers – 325 Graff Main Hall
Vol. 44, No. 12
I. Roll Call.
Present: J. Anderson, C. Angell, J. Baggett, S. Brokaw, D. Buffton, B. Butterfield, V. Crank, G.
Cravins, T. Gendreau, J. Heim, K. Hoar, J. Holman, K. Hunt, D. Lake (absent), R. LeDocq, A. Loh, C.
Lee, R. Mikat (absent), J. Miskowski, S. Shillinger, R. Smith, M. Tollefson, B. Van Voorhis and M.
Wycoff-Horn (excused)
II. Minutes of March 11 approved.
III. Reports.
a. Faculty Senate Chair.
i. ACE Fellow Visit: ACE (American Council on Education) Fellow, Dr. Ken Lee, will
visit UWL on Tuesday, April 6. A faculty governance meeting has been scheduled for
2:30-3:30 in the FS chambers. The ACE program is for individuals who are beginning
a career in administration. Their home institution pays their salary for a year while
they shadow an administrator at another institution. Dr. Ken Lee is shadowing Kevin
Reilly.
ii. Ron Kind Visit: Ron Kind will be in the lobby of the Eagle Rec Center at 3:30pm on
Tuesday, April 6 to unveil the Unhealthy Choices Act.
iii. Local Legislators Forum: Our local legislators will be on campus on Friday, April 16
at 1:00pm in 339 Cartwright Center.
iv. Collective Bargaining Open Forums: AFT is sponsoring two open forums and has
invited a speaker to discuss how shared governance would be affected. The forums are
scheduled for Monday, April 12 from 4:30 to 5:30pm in 257 Cartwright Center and
Tuesday, April 13 from 12:30 to 1:30 in 326 Cartwright Center.
v. Wittich Hall Update: Some brainstorming sessions are taking place to discuss possible
uses for Wittich Hall. The first meeting took place on March 31. This is still in the
idea stage and any building remodels would depend on UWS funding.
vi. Timing of FS meetings: The April 15 and April 29 FS meetings are likely to run past
5:00pm – please plan accordingly. We have several orders of business to complete
before the end of the semester. A reminder that the April 29 FS meeting is also the
organizational meeting for the 45th Faculty Senate.
b. Faculty Reps.
i. Update from the last Faculty Reps meeting:
1. Online Courses: Who owns/controls the copyright? Some community colleges
have had instructors of online courses sign their rights over to the university.
UWL does not do this.
2. Collective Bargaining Update: Eau Claire and Superior are getting closer to a
vote – the exact date is yet to be determined. UWL has an organizing
committee.
3. Educational Attainment – now being called More Degrees for Wisconsin.
4. Competitive University Workforce Commission - This committee will forward
its report to the BOR in about a month. Handouts have been posted to the FS
website.
5. E-portfolios - Some are concerned about security and privacy.
6. E-campus – Some campuses perceive this to be part of the growth agenda and
see it as a potential threat. The same concerns have been raised about the new
degree type. However, UWS has been clear that these are geared toward “over
the traditional age” students.
ii. Health Care Bill – Several items that concern education have been built into this bill;
such as keeping Pell Grants at $5300. In addition, students can now be covered under
their parents’ health care plan to age 26. Does the UWS health care plan fall under the
Cadillac Plan clause and become eligible to be taxed? This is still an unknown.
iii. Everyone is encouraged to vote in the upcoming elections for appellate court judge.
iv. Reminder that Ron Kind and our Local Legislators will be on campus next week.
Carol Miller will be showing an agriculture-related film on Tuesday, April 6 at 2:15pm
in 122 Carl Wimberly Hall. Ron Kind will be on hand for discussion afterward.
c. Chancellor.
i. Dean of Students office has been very busy, but doing wonderful work.
ii. Budget News: UWS is talking about More Degrees for Wisconsin (formerly
Educational Attainment). UWL has forwarded our GQA numbers. The original
incentive funds approach has been abandoned, but how the goals and budget requests
will be handled is still unclear. UWS is planning to require a minimum 3% increase in
graduation and retention rates. Ours is already very high (70% 6-year graduation and
90% retention) and the Chancellor has told UWS that we cannot guarantee a 3%
increase.
IV. SEC Recommendation concerning APR.
SEC recommends making a one-year exception to the Faculty Senate Bylaws as they relate to the APR
committee in order to allow current members who have served for 3 years to sign up for one additional
year on APR, if they are interested in doing so. Motion to allow current 3rd year members of APR to
request a 4th year. Motion approved.
V. Online Course Policies.
After the February 11th Senate Discussion of the Online Course Handbook, Senate reached a
consensus that a committee needed to be assembled to look more closely at what new policies (if any) are
needed in relation to online and hybrid courses. The SEC determined that initially a small group of
faculty, including representatives from the Online Advisory Council (OAC) and Faculty Senate, should
attempt to work through this issue, using the policies given in the Online Course Handbook as a starting
point. The group consisted of Steve Brokaw (OAC and FS), Kerrie Hoar (FS), Kenny Hunt (FS),
Adrienne Loh (FS) and Jodie Rindt (OAC).
The group met on February 18th and discussed the need for definition of online and hybrid courses. It
was later discovered that the Faculty Senate had previously approved definitions for online, hybrid and
distance education courses. These definitions were part of a recommendation from UCC that was
approved by Senate on September 28, 2006.
The group made two recommendations to SEC. First, Faculty Senate should vote only on new
policies that would be incorporated into the Faculty Senate Articles and Bylaws. The content and layout
of the Online Handbook should be determined by the Director of Online Education and the Online
Advisory Committee. Faculty Senate has no purview over this handbook and should not vote to approve
or endorse the document. Second, some suggestions on layout and verbiage for the Handbook should be
forwarded to the Online Director.
The group also forwarded four new policy recommendations to SEC to be discussed and voted on at
FS. All policies that govern face-to-face courses also apply to online, hybrid and distance education
courses, with the following exceptions/additions. These come to the FS as separate motions from SEC.
Policy #1: The department should determine the format (e.g., face-to-face, hybrid, online) of courses
offered through that department.


This recommendation would require a change to the FS Articles and Bylaws; therefore, it
comes to FS today as a first read for discussion only.
Discussion: The term online currently does not appear in the Articles and Bylaws. FS did
approve a broad definition brought forward by UCC in 2006; however, it may be in our best
interest to have a precise definition in the Articles and Bylaws if we are going to include policy to
regulate them.
Policy #2: Required courses offered in an online format must also be offered face-to-face during the
academic year. Should a department wish to request an exception to this policy, they should seek
approval through the Committee on Academic Policies and Standards (CAPS). This policy does not
apply to courses that are part of an online degree program.




This subject has come up in previous discussions. FS would recommend this as a Records &
Registration policy.
Motion to approve.
Discussion: Online courses come with a fee and students should not be required to pay extra to
get their degree. Some students may learn better in a face-to-face environment; however, perhaps
some students learn better in an online environment. Is there a way to waive the online fee for
required courses? We are a face-to-face institution, so we should not be requiring an online course
in our majors.
Motion approved.
Policy #3: Any electronic course management system used must comply with all applicable statutes and
laws. (e.g., FERPA, copyright).



Move to approve.
Discussion: The Online Handbook strongly recommends the use of a campus supported course
management tool. If you choose your own, you must still comply with all laws and statutes and
you will not have tech support from ITS. This could require students to purchase additional
software. This policy, as stated, really just says that faculty must follow the law – do we need a
policy for this?
Motion failed.
Policy #4: Instructors teaching their first online course at UW-L are required to complete an online
training program on how to design and deliver quality online courses. Instructors who have completed a
similar training course at another institution can request that this requirement be waived by their
department.


This recommendation would require a change to the FS Articles and Bylaws; therefore, it
comes to FS today as a first read for discussion only.
Discussion: Could the motivation to include this requirement be to improve/bolster the quality of
online instruction? Comparison to the requirement to be Writing Emphasis certified. Comparison
to the lack of any training course to teach a face-to-face course. Many colleges across the country
have a similar training requirement. UWL already requires training for those teaching MBA
online courses. This is a 3-week training course – usually 7 to 10 hours per week. It is a good
idea to have such a resource, but we should not require it. This would protect both the faculty
member and the student and would ensure that the student would have a quality educational
experience. Is this an infringement on academic freedom? We all had many years of experience
in a face-to-face environment as a student prior to teaching – how many have had that much
experience in an online environment? The methodology is quite different between face-to-face
and online courses. Perhaps we won’t need such training course 3 or 5 years down the road. Can
we attach a sunset clause? Perhaps we could allow waivers for any previous online experience to
make the policy more flexible.
VI. Graduate Council Appeals Process (Tom Krueger).
a. This new process would make the graduate appeals process more directly parallel to the
undergraduate appeals process.
b. Motion to approve the changes to the Graduate Appeals Process.
c. Discussion: Some found the flowchart difficult to follow.
d. Motion approved.
VII. APC Report (Steve Senger).
APC was charged to "review existing criteria for new program proposals to determine whether they are
sufficient for any program that may include the use of online courses". Proposed changes are
underlined and italicized in both the Guidelines for Program Creation & Elimination and the Certificate
Guidelines.
Proposals for new programs should discuss the use of online courses. Where proposals build on
existing programs, prior use and effectiveness of online offerings shall be addressed. For these
purposes, an online course is one where fewer than 50% of the contact hours are as face-to- face
classroom activities.
Motion to approve the above change to the Guidelines for Program Creation & Elimination and the
Certificate Guidelines.
Motion to change “should” to “shall.” Motion approved.
Motion to approve the APC recommendation with the above approved change. Motion approved
VIII. New Business.
IX. Old Business.
X. Adjournment at 4:55 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kerrie Hoar