1 GBB 202, 12:10-1:00 p.m. Graduate Council Meeting Minutes 3/13/13

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.
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.