1 Graduate Council Meeting Minutes 3/13/13 GBB 202, 12:10-1:00 p.m. Members Present: M. Alwell, R. Arouca A. Borgmann, D. Campbell, B.Klaassen, N. Hassanein, J. Hodgin, J. Hunt, J. Johnson, M. Mayer, H. Naughton, S. Sprang, E. Stone Members Absent/Excused: D. Biehl, K. Swift, D. Zielaski, J. Zink Ex-officio members Present: B. Brown, N. Hinman S. Ross Guest: N. Haddad, Registrar Johnson The meeting was called to order by Chair Borgmann. The 3/6/13 minutes were approved after discussion of the first couple business items. Business Items Professor Haddad summarized the issue for their Clinical PhD students. The program requires a one-year internship. While on internship the student registers for a 1 credit course (638). The problem is the creditors send letters requesting loan payment because the student is not considered full-time. Some things have changed in terms of reporting that have made the previous deferment procedure difficult. The following resolution was approved to remedy the issue. One credit of PSYX 638 Clinical Psychology Internship per semester is equivalent to full-time enrollment for students in the Clinical Psychology PhD Program. There was a brief discussion regarding the need for a broader fix for other analogous situations when students are required to work outside the university. The situations must be dealt with on a case-by-case basis to determine the proper approach. Field work is somewhat different than the situation above. Prior to the meeting members were provided with four samples of how to design an assessment instrument for advising. The discussion included topics such as when the survey should be given, whether it should be given to all students or just a sample. Students’ anonymity and reluctance to participate given the potential repercussions and the need for letters of recommendation concerns. There are also UFA implications in terms of the extent to which the process conflicts with the FEC procedure. Should the mechanism be rolled into program review or department assessment materials? It seems that one of the gaps in program review is the graduate experience, and this could be where the Graduate Council could add value to the process. However, in order to evaluate the graduate experience there need to be guidelines or standards. The Graduate School currently has a student working on a survey to collect retention rates and time to completion data from programs. 2 Chair Borgmann asked that the Council to think about the issue some more and be prepared to vote on the following options next week: o Do nothing. o Develop an assessment instrument and a procedure to administer it. o Identify best practices / samples that include suggestions for an assessment of the graduate student experience. The meeting was adjourned at 12:56 PM.