Graduate Council Meeting Minutes
April 14, 2010
GBB 202, 12:10-1:00 p.m.
Members Present: C. Anderson, R. Bolton, D. Erickson, L. Frey J. Hirstein, J. Hunt, N.
Moisey, C. Palmer, G. Quintero, C. Winkler
Members Absent/Excused: E. Hurd, M. McGuirl, C. VonReichert
Ex-officio members Present: P. Brown, S. Ross
The meeting was called to order at 12:10 p.m.
The 4/7/10 minutes were amended and approved.
Communications

Associate Provost Brown updated the Council on a specific recommendation from
the Accreditation Team. The campus should have an orientation for every
graduate student. Some programs provide a department orientation, but the
information dissemination is not consistent across disciplines. It is likely that a
web based program will be implemented that includes answers to frequently
asked questions and other important information.
The exit report was favorable. The University was already aware of the items
identified for improvement and has initiated improvement efforts. There was a
strong recommendation to improve the College of Technology facilities and to
implement a more structured way to document assessment. The detailed report
from the Accreditation Team will be sent to the Provost’s Office in approximately
30 days. The University will then be given the opportunity to respond. The final
report will be submitted to the Commission June 1st.
The accreditation team member that met with the Council referenced Policy 2.D.2
when the issue of 300 UG courses was discussed.
Standard 2.D.2
Programs of study at the graduate level are guided by well-defined and
appropriate educational objectives and differ from undergraduate programs
in requiring greater depth of study and increased demands on student
intellectual or creative capacities.

A senator proposed an amendment to the Council’s co-convening proposal at last
week’s Faculty Senate meeting (appended). Strategies for the senate debate were
discussed. The resolution below was approved. It will be read on the floor if the
amendment is passed. Professor Moisey and Erickson will have a conversation
with Senators Vonessen (Mathematical Sciences) and Spencer (EVST) to explain
the reasoning behind the proposal. The elimination of 300 UG courses is a matter
of academic quality. Students may be required to take 300 level courses as
prerequisites, but they should not count toward graduate credits.
Resolution
The Graduate Council regards Senator Vonessen’s resolution as an
unfriendly amendment. Because it would vitiate the intent of our
seconded motion, essentially preserving the current 300 level UG system
and adding to it a further layer of review. If Senator Vonessen’s proposed
amendment is approved, the Graduate Council will withdraw its seconded
motion.
Business Items
Bertha Morton
 The Bertha Morton ratings were discussed. It was agreed that three fellowships
would be awarded and one candidate from the middle group was identified to
receive a scholarship. If any candidates turn down the award to attend another
institution the funds will be returned to the endowment.
Fellowship candidates:
Shawn M. Crimmins
Mark Mayer
Tammy Mildenstein
Additional Scholarship candidate
Katherine V. Aldrich
The meeting was adjourned at 1:00.
________________________________________________________________________
Date: April 8, 2010 From: Nikolaus Vonessen, Mathematical Sciences
Whereas
 graduate students should in general be discouraged from taking 300-level courses,
 but taking 300-level UG courses (up to the maximum of 6 credits) can sometimes
make the graduate degree of an individual student stronger and more valuable,
Please consider the following modification of the Graduate Council’s Motion:
Instead of eliminating the G-designation from all 300-level UG-courses, institute the
following petition procedure:
A 300-level UG course can count towards the graduate degree of an individual graduate
student only upon approval of a petition to the Graduate Council (or a subcommittee of
the Graduate Council).
a. The petition must be made by the advisor on behalf of the student. In the petition,
the advisor must give compelling reasons why taking the 300-level UG course is
beneficial for the graduate student’s degree.
b. The petition must be approved by the Director of the graduate student’s degree
program before it is submitted to the Graduate Council.
c. The current limit of 6 credits of 300-level UG-courses remains in effect.
d. Further details of the petition process will be determined by the Graduate Council.
Rationale
1. Example: How a 300-level UG course can make a graduate degree stronger.
A graduate student from the sciences (say biology or forestry) determines, in
consultation with her advisor, that it would help her to learn mathematical
statistics. She has taken calculus, and the appropriate first class to take is UG
STAT 341. Taking it, and maybe other statistics courses based on it, will
significantly strengthen her degree. Note that she will have to fulfill the graduate
increment when she takes STAT 341.
2. So why not make UG STAT 341 a 400-level course? Well, STAT 341 is aimed
at undergraduate math majors. And for undergraduate math majors, it is certainly
a 300-level course. Changing the number to the 400-level would be inappropriate
and detrimental to the undergraduate math program.
3. It seems likely that the petition process will reduce the number of 300-level UGcourses taken by graduate students. In particular, a graduate student first has to
convince his or her advisor to write a petition.
4. There is seemingly the suspicion that graduate students take 300-level UG courses
in order to avoid taking harder and more appropriate courses. I doubt that there
are any data to confirm this. I would guess that currently nobody really knows
why graduate students take 300-level UG-courses. After a year or two of
reading petitions, the Graduate Council will at the least have a better idea
why graduate students want to take 300-level UG courses (and if that is
really a bad idea).
5. Not all 300-level courses have the UG designation. For the petition process as
outlined above to work, it is necessary that the 300-level courses which are
currently UG courses retain that designation.
6. The additional workload for the Graduate Council is certainly a drawback.