Graduate Council Meeting Minutes
December 8, 2010
GBB 202, 12:10-1:00 p.m.
Members Present: A. Borgmann, K. Canty, M. Ehrman, D. Erickson, J. Hirstein, J.
Hodgin, R. Judd, N. Moisey, H. Naughten, J. Olson, C. Palmer, G. Quintero, W. Shields,
R. Shortbull
Members Absent/Excused:
Ex-officio members Present: S. Ross, S. Sprang
The meeting was called to order at 12:10 p.m.
The 12/1/10 minutes were approved.
Communications
 A discrepancy was found on the course form for PT 520. The course title
listed on the form was not the same as the title in the description. The
consent agenda was corrected to list the correct title.
Business Items

Professor Moisey summarized the document listing the Council’s
recommendations regarding the future of the IIP and MIS degrees.
The Associate Provost of Graduate Studies would like to be convinced that the
programs are genuinely interdisciplinary, serve a unique purpose, are
sufficiently productive, and have value. If there is enthusiastic support he
may recommend the interdisciplinary programs be considered a priority and
new funding be allocated.
The Council was reminded of President Engstrom’s “pursuit of selective
excellence” goal. He encourages greater emphasis on quality and less on
quantity.
The programs have functioned with little support, so the Council should
consider them as new programs and determine whether they serve a viable
need and have sufficient quality. After discussion the Council voted to
support the programs – MIS (8 members in favor, 5 opposed) / IIP (9
members in support and 4 opposed).
The programs are scheduled to be reviewed in 2011-2012. The Council may
decide to withdraw its support at that time. It was suggested that specific
expectations / benchmarks be identified and the program given provisional
status.
Section 3.c of the recommendations document was amended to provide one
student assistantship to either the MIS or IIP. The point was made that IIP
applicants are not a recruitable population so the assistantship would not be
necessary. The Director would have the discretion of determining the best use
of the assistantship. The amended document (appended below) was approved
with 8 members in favor and 4 opposed.
The meeting was adjourned at 1:05 p.m.
IIP Oversight Committee
Graduate Council Recommendations to the Interim Associate Provost of Graduate
Studies regarding the future of the IIP and MIS degrees.
12/8/2010
The Graduate Council recommends the following;
1. That the IIP and the MIS degrees be housed under the jurisdiction of the
Associate Provost for Graduate Education.
2. The IIP and MIS degree Programs will be reviewed following the same schedule
and procedures as other UM graduate programs.
3.
Resources will be made available to adequately fund the joint IIP/MIS programs.
a. Appoint an IIP/MIS Program Director, drawn from the pool of tenured
UM faculty members, with an administrative reassignment commensurate
with the time commitment and responsibilities of a Program Director.
b. An annual fall Seminar in Integrative Methodology and Pedagogy should
be developed and funded, along with an annual spring Colloquium in
Integrative Research. (Funding should be identified to pay for adjunct
instructors who fill in for the Director’s and the Seminar leader’s teaching
reductions).
c. A designated IIP graduate student assistantship in addition to the current
MIS student assistantship. A total of one student assistantship will be
allocated to the programs. The Director will determine how it will be
used.
d. Additional resources for a .25 support staff position, a faculty and student
travel budget, and for periodic external evaluations as per the program
review schedule.
4. The IIP/MIS Program Director will be expected to devote the necessary time and
resources for administering and promoting the program both on and off campus.
a. Convene an Advisory Board of UM faculty members.
b. Convene an IIP/MIS Admissions Committee of UM faculty members.
c. Develop, update and improve on-line and printed promotional materials
that are aimed at non-traditional students, international students, and
students of diverse ethnic backgrounds.
d. Provide oversight and leadership in program development, program
review and recruitment and retention initiatives for the IIP/MIS degrees.
5. Colleges, Schools, and Departments should be encouraged to recognize the value
of interdisciplinary and collaborative activities as they contribute towards
promotion, tenure, and merit.
Appendix A.
Recommendations from “Review of the Master in Interdisciplinary Studies (M.I.S.)
Program (6/18/2010)” Submitted to Dr. Perry Brown (Interim Associate Provost) by
the MIS Review Committee
7.2 Recommendations
Following closely on the recommendations of the 2007 review of the M.I.S., this M.I.S.
Review Committee urges the following measures:
Recommendations:
1. The program should be housed under the jurisdiction of the Associate Provost for
Graduate Education.
2. A program Director should be appointed, drawn from the pool of tenured faculty
members, and compensated with a reduction in teaching load.
3. An Advisory Board of faculty members should be created.
4. A designated graduate student assistantship should remain in place and more should be
added.
5. Funding should be identified to pay for adjunct instructors (who fill in for the
Director’s and the Seminar leader’s teaching reductions), a graduate assistantship, .5
staff, faculty and student travel, and periodic external evaluations.
6. Colleges, Schools, and Departments should be encouraged to recognize the value of
interdisciplinary and collaborative activities as they contribute towards promotion,
tenure, and merit.
Additionally, the program needs to be formally structured in order to ensure its quality
and consistent implementation. The current structure could be improved. Drawbacks of
the program include students operating as “lone wolves” with little structured opportunity
to engage with other graduate students and no specified instruction in interdisciplinary
methodologies.
Recommendations:
7. An annual fall Seminar in Integrative Methodology and Pedagogy should be developed
and funded, along with an annual spring Colloquium in Integrative Research.
8. Admissions deadlines for each semester should be established (April 1 for Fall
Semester, November 1 for Spring Semester).
9. Graduate School requirements for the M.I.S. Program should continue to be
implemented. Some applicants should be encouraged to spend a prior semester at UM as
non-degree graduate students working with faculty to develop an M.I.S. plan of study and
research.
10. Students should be evaluated each semester by their faculty mentor. Semester
Portfolios should be used in this process.
11. The program itself requires regular internal (by faculty and graduate students) and
external evaluations.
12. Appropriate forms for monitoring aspects of the program (student committees, plan of
study, mentoring commitments, etc.) should be developed.
Student recruitment has relied primarily on individual meetings with the Dean of the
Graduate School. Recruitment should be structured and enhanced.
Recommendations:
13. The UM Honors College should be encouraged to develop similar options at the
undergraduate level.
14. The M.I.S. Program Director should devote time and resources to promoting the
program on and off campus. Updated and improved on-line and printed promotional
materials should be developed and aimed at non-traditional students, international
students, and students of diverse ethnic backgrounds.
8. Budgetary Considerations
The primary expense of a re-structured M.I.S. Program is staffing. The M.I.S. Review
Committee recommends the development of two new core courses: a Seminar in
Integrative Methodology and Pedagogy (Autumn Semester, 3 credits), and a Colloquium
in Integrative Research (Spring Semester, 1 credit).
Thus, the Director (or the instructor) teaches the equivalent of 4 course credits per year.
In addition, the Director would be advising students, and the M.I.S. Review Committee
feels that—based on former Dean Strobel’s experience from many years of directing
M.I.S.—this advising is equivalent to an additional 2 course credits per year. Therefore,
the here proposed new M.I.S. Program structure would require a 6 course credits buyout.
This buyout would most likely need to be covered by money outside the hosting
department in order to attract an existing faculty member and department to take on this
new role. In addition to these salary costs, the new M.I.S. Program structure would
require a .50 FTE administrative assistant as well as a student employee to assist the
director and facilitate the daily administration of the program. The student assistantship is
already in place and funding must be continued. Furthermore, the M.I.S. Review
Committee recommends the allocation of funds for
participate, for
example, in national meetings;
flyers, and posters;