Graduate Council meeting 2/12/2104
Present:
Carol DeFilippo, Andreas Savakis, John McCluskey, Jim Perkins, Marla
Schweppe, Tom Trabold, Don Wilson, Joe Hornak, Hans-Peter Bischof, Hrushikesh
Sagar, Christine M. Licata, Fesat Sahin, Hector Flores, Deanna Jacobs
Three policy issues were on the agenda:
1. Minimum GPA to graduate under the +/- system.
2. Changing conversion practices to policies.
3. Can departments set higher standards for probation?
1. Minimum GPA to graduate under the +/- system
Linda Tolan requested a review of the +/- policy and asked if RIT should maintain
the 3.0 minimum for graduate students to successfully complete their programs or
change the minimum to 2.66 in keeping with the strict interpretation of +/- grade
scheme and their weights:
A
4.000
A3.667
B+
3.333
B
3.000
B2.667
C+
2.333
C
2.000
C1.667
D
1.000
F
0.000
Several points were discussed including but not limited to studies which show the
+/- grade scheme will lower the GPA; is an A+ necessary to offset a minus grade
(under the old system an A + C = B. In the new system an A + C- = B- or 2.66 which is
less than the accepted 3.0. An A+ + C- = B, thus maintaining a 3.0), yet an A+ is
higher than 4.0 and that raises other issues; the student government in 2009
wanted the +/- but there were not any graduate students represented then. The
new pool of students currently attending RIT and graduate student representation
in student government might show a change in opinion about +/- ; benchmarking
the policies of other schools in terms of grades was suggested; employers would
likely perceive a 2.66 GPA as a decrease in program quality. Also, would the
minimum acceptable GPA for applicants to grad school be a 2.66?
It was decided to vote for or against the 3.0 GPA minimum requirements for
graduate students with the suggestion to revisit the issue in two years after
implementation (academic year 2015-16) after data has been collected.
The vote was 13 in favor of keeping the 3.0 cut-off; 1 vote for changing the cut-off to
a 2.66; 0 abstentions.
2. Changing conversion practices to policies
To formalize the language and put it into the policy manual:
Graduate Credit
The following language has been used for approving new programs
No more than 20% of the courses taken in a masters level degree program can be
graduate courses that are cross-listed with undergraduate courses. Cross-listed studio
courses do not count towards this limit. In certain cases, the Provost may allow
exceptions to this rule provided there is sufficient justification.
If an undergraduate and graduate course is to be cross-listed, the undergraduate
course must be at the 500 level or higher and the graduate course must be at the 600
level. Additional advanced level learning outcomes and educational experiences
designed expressly for graduate students (content, instruction, and workload) are
required in any graduate level course that is dual-listed with an undergraduate course.
Question – does a 600-level course mean 600-699? The consensus is yes.
Question – what is the perceived difference between a 600-level course and a 700level course? Consensus is that a 600-level course is entry level and can be crosslisted with upper level undergraduate courses. A 700-level course is high level,
graduate only, and cannot be cross-listed with an upper level undergraduate course.
There is no current NYS policy on the designations.
Exceptions were discussed such as two drawing classes, one undergraduate and one
graduate, using the same model in the same room at the same time. Are there
similar exceptions in the science and engineering programs? Is it up to the
instructor? Discussion ensued as to the restrictive room use policy by the
registrar’s office (logistical issues?) and it was decided to table the discussion until
the next meeting.
3. Can departments set higher standards for probation?
To be discussed at the next meeting
Hector Flores took the opportunity to introduce the Dimension 3: Research and
Graduate Education document for discussion. Strategic Plan task force is already
structured around 6 dimensions. The one for the GC is about Dimension 3. The 3page charge was distributed. The Graduate Studies strategic plan was not included
in the reading materials. Hector and Linda Underhill are two members. Hector
worked with Kit Mayberry and Callie Babbitt (co-chair). Seeking a balanced
representation from research base program faculty and those in professional
education. It will be challenging to integrate the goals from both groups. Goal is 2025 members; currently 21. Need a graduate student representative.
Hector is seeking any input or suggestions on the charge as there is a tight timeline.
This discussion will be continued at the next meeting.