Graduate Council Meeting Minutes 10/12/11
GBB 202, 12:10-1:00 p.m.
Members Present: D. Campbell, D. Erickson, J. Halfpap, A. HeavyRunner-Rioux, J.
Hodgin, J. Hunt, R. Judd, M. Mayer, H. Naughton, C. Palmer, K. Swift
Members Absent/Excused: A. Borgmann, J. VanDyke
Ex-officio members Present: S. Ross, S. Sprang
The meeting was called to order at 12:10 p.m.
The 9/28/11 minutes were amended and approved.
Business Items

The Council briefly discussed the distribution of curriculum forms. It agreed that
one-time only the Linguistics proposals would be reviewed by Humanities instead of
Social Science for a more equitable distribution of the workload.

The Humanities subcommittee is waiting for curriculum review follow-up responses
and will report next week.

The Humanities subcommittee reported on its program review progress. It is
disappointed in the quality of the external reviewer’s report. Perhaps the instructions
to the reviewers should be more specific and the administration should have more say
in the selection of the external reviewer. There is also concern that the subcommittee
members do not have an adequate knowledge base to evaluate the program.
Associate Provost Sprang indicated that the Program Review process is a spring
priority. It will be helpful to revamp the structure of the self-study requirements to
include statistical data that is available through the Office of Planning, Budgeting,
and Analysis. All materials need to be crafted in a way that is more useful to
programs and tied to the strategic plan. The process needs to be streamlined to
eliminate inconsistencies. The Council’s current procedure will be sent to Associate
Provost Sprang.
In contrast the external review for Sociology was completed by an experienced
reviewer and was well done. He identified flaws in the process and recommends
more than one reviewer. The university does not have the funds for a team of
reviewers. Therefore, the Academic Officers are considering alternatives such as
online reviewers or internal reviewers accompany the external reviewers. Programs
with accreditation standards are required to be reviewed by an accreditation team.

The Bertha Morton Workgroup incorporated the information about distribution into
the procedure (appended below). The revised procedure was approved unanimously
by the Council.

The Council approved the Graduate Certificate Procedures (appended below).

The Council discussed a possible procedure for the WAGS/UMI awards. Apparently
the announcement was sent to chairs last year, but there were no nominations. The
previous year Graduate Council was consulted regarding the review and established a
procedure. It was suggested that the announcement also be sent to graduate program
directors and advertised on the Graduate Council website. There was some
uncertainly regarding the amount of the award, how it can be used, and whether PhD
students are eligible. Associate Dean Ross will investigate. The draft procedures
will be sent to the Graduate School Administration.
The meeting was adjourned at 1:00 PM.
Procedure Number:
Procedure:
Date Adopted:
Last Revision:
Approved by:
303.10
Bertha Morton Fellowhsips / Scholarships
1978
2/17/10; 10/12/11
Graduate Council
I. Nomination Deadline: The Deadline is usually mid March. Fellowships (if awarded) are
$5000 and Scholarships are $3000 each. To be eligible for nomination, a student must
be admitted to a graduate program, and enrolled for the upcoming fall semester. Late or
incomplete applications will not be considered. No supplementary materials will be
considered, and nominating documents should make no reference to or comparison
with other nominees. The Council evaluates and ranks all nominations. Nomination
documentation and recommendations should be grounded on the student's academic
record and accomplishments in one or more of the following areas:
1. Honors and awards
2. Professional certifications and credentials
3. Evidence of research and other academic achievements
4. Evidence of professional and community achievements
5. Additional achievements and creative activities
6. Evidence of contribution to society
II. Department/Program Nominations (edited 10/12/11)
1. Units able to nominate recipients of the Bertha Morton Fellowship/Scholarship
are (a) departments and (b) programs that are interdepartmental with no one
home for the program, e,g., Wildlife Biology. All programs that fall within one
department will follow the respective department nomination procedures.
2. Nominations from each department / program are based upon the formula:
One nominee for up to 20 enrolled students
Two nominees for up to 40 enrolled students
Three nominees for up to 60 enrolled students
Four nominees for up to 80 enrolled students
Five nominees for up to 100 enrolled students
Six nominees for over 100 enrolled students
Department/programs may not trade nominees with other
department/programs.
3. The Graduate School will maintain a master list of departments/programs on
campus eligible for nominations to the fellowship/scholarships and re-evaluate
the quantity of nominations from each department / program in January
annually and share that information on February 1st through an announcement
sent to each department/program soliciting nominations for the Bertha Morton
Fellowships/Scholarships. During this annual re-evaluation, new departments on
campus or new interdisciplinary programs will be added to the master list.
The list will include the department/program name, number of graduate
students, and number of nominations allowed, e.g.,
Department/Program Name
Mathematics
Number of Grad Students
29
# Nominees
2
III. Graduate Council Screening Procedure (2/20/08, 2/17/10, edited 10/12/11)
Step 1: Initial Screening
Each subcommittee (Humanities, Sciences, Social Sciences, and Schools) will review all
nominations in their area. Each application should receive a score from 1(weak) to
5(strong) by each group member. Each applicant is then assigned an average score. The
subcommittee will then rank its applicants (based on the average scores), so that each
application has an average score and is ranked in order of the average score. The
subcommittee will bring forward up to the top 50%* to the whole committee, along
with the applicants' average scores.
The scores will be tabulated by Graduate Council to determine the top, middle and
bottom candidates. The middle candidates will then be re-reviewed by a subgroup
made up of one representative from each subcommittee and scored 1(weak)-5(strong).
This process should identify the candidates in the top and middle groups who will
receive the award. If there are ties, the Council can discuss the merits of the
applications as a whole to make a decision.
At the discretion of the Council, one or more fellowships may be awarded to
outstanding applicants. If more than one candidate is deemed outstanding but funding
is limited, then the top ranked candidates (at most one from each group) will be
reviewed and ranked 1(weak)-5(strong) by every member of Graduate Council. The
scores will be averaged to determine the successful fellowship candidate(s).
Step 2: Final Screening
The top 20* nominations will receive the award. The nominations ranked 21-40* will
each be discussed. An additional 10* will be chosen to receive the award.
*Note: the numbers 50%, 20, 21-40, and 10 are approximate and will be recalculated
annually based on the number of awards, the number of applicants, and overall
differences in the averages of the reviewers.
________________________________________________________________________
Procedure Number:
Procedure:
Date Adopted:
Last Revision:
Approved by:
302.10
Graduate Certificate Program Guidelines
10/12/11
10/12/11
Graduate Council
Certificate programs governed by these policy guidelines are academic, credit-bearing
programs that end with the awarding of a certificate rather than a graduate degree. They
require between 12 and 29 semester credits as defined in BOR Policy 301.1 and they
must be approved by the UM Faculty Senate prior to implementation.
Certificate programs established under these guidelines are designed for developing
specialized skills and knowledge. They often have a practical or applied orientation and
they are intended to indicate to prospective employers that the certificate holder has
completed a Faculty Senate approved course of study.
A Faculty Senate approved certificate program is the only kind of graduate certificate
program whose certificate may include the words “awarded by The University of
Montana” or “The University of Montana awards…” The awarding of a Faculty Senate
approved graduate certificate is recorded on the student’s transcript.
Guidelines for Graduate Council Review
1. Each certificate program shall require a minimum of 12 semester credits.
Twenty-nine semester credits are the maximum credits for a graduate certificate
without Board of Regents approval.
2. Each graduate certificate shall have a common core of at least six semester credits
to ensure internal coherence.
3. In addition to elective courses, certificate programs may designate other
requirements such as licensure requirements or other professionally required
certificates, internships, work projects, or attendance at professional meetings and
symposia.
4. The content of the required and practical courses shall reflect the practical
knowledge, skills, and abilities that the certificate program purports to develop.
5. All courses for the certificate shall be completed with a minimum grade of B-.
(This does not preclude programs from setting higher minimum requirements).
Procedural Guidelines
1. Each certificate program shall be reviewed by the Graduate Council and approved
by the Faculty Senate before the first certificate may be awarded.
2. Graduate certificate programs are open to students in either degree or non-degree
admission categories.
3. All certificates issued by the Registrar shall be of similar design, include The
University of Montana logo, and be of sufficiently good quality to have a
professional appearance. The wording that appears on the certificate must be
approved by the Provost.
4. The name of the certificate program and the date awarded shall be recorded on the
student’s transcript.
5. Each certificate program shall be reviewed in conjunction with the regularly
scheduled review of the academic unit(s).