Undergraduate Academic Council
Meeting Date:
Monday, December 17, 2005, 9:30-11:05 AM
Present:
J. Philippe Abraham, Scott Barclay, Seth Chaiken, Richard Collier, Sue Faerman, Robert
Gibson, Anne Hildreth, Carolyn Malloch, Lisa Trubitt, Daniel Truchan, Guest: Lawrence Snyder
Minutes:
Minutes from the December 12, 2005 meeting were reviewed and corrections acknowledged.
Those minutes, with required updates, were approved.
Gen Ed Subcommittee Discussion Continued:
Anne Hildreth discussed the strengthened campus-based assessment implementation update from
October 4, 2005. The Gen Ed Assessment Subcommittee discussions during the semester
included critical thinking, writing, and math and stats. Determining local rubrics was also
discussed. The critical thinking group provided recommendations which will be incorporated
into the proposal. Suggestions included adopting the critical thinking and SUNY-wide
disciplinary panel rubrics.
Student engagement assessment was also reviewed. Dr. Anderson, Vice President for Student
Success and Vice Provost for Institutional Assessment and Diversity, attended the assessment
meeting and recommended campus adoption of the National Survey of Student Engagement
(NSSE). Dr. Anderson is familiar with national instrument from previous institutions. There are
advantages to using the national instrument in that SUNY pays and administers it, local
questions may be added, and the subcommittee believes results would be protected. Indiana
University developed and administered the instrument. The instrument focuses on both academic
features and campus environment. A member noted it’s more welcoming to have the University
develop the program in lieu of a conglomerate. A member mentioned that at the Senate meeting
on the 13th a question might be raised regarding critical thinking and writing. Will they be across
all courses? Yes, that was a recommendation by the subcommittee.
In regards to writing and critical thinking, how do we improve writing instruction on the
campus? The suggested rubric will be introduced to faculty to be incorporated with their
instructions on giving feedback to students and how the teaching is to be handled. Anne
mentioned expected changes in how writing is to be completed would be suggested within the
next year or two. The subcommittee will continue to discuss how rubrics on campus are used in a
broader assessment. Anne mentioned she believes the rubrics are reasonable and thoughtfully
constructed, that faculty could discover portion(s) to utilize in their courses, etc.
Anne mentioned she believes that in terms of classes, faculty has been given flexibility in
teaching the writing objectives.
With a Spring 2008 implementation, there is plenty of time for discussions, training in CETL,
etc. It’s preferred to incorporate the SUNY rubrics with what faculty currently teaches. The
suggestion was made that student leaders be included when explaining rubrics and how they are
incorporated.
UAC Minutes, 12/19/05
Page 2 of 4
A question was raised by the subcommittee with how to motivate faculty in convincing students
to take a national test. How can the students be convinced to sit for a test?
Regarding Math and Stats, the subcommittee requested that Anne explore how other SUNY
centers handle their rubric as well as what type of structure they follow. Anne pointed out that if
we went to a national exam, faculty would lose class time to administer the test. However,
surveys show students are motivated to complete the test and do well if they are informed it will
become part of their grade. Anne informed the Council that SUNY so far has not approved a
particular plan for Math and Stats and believes the deadline will be extended due to the
unavailability of a suitable national test. It was noted that Patty Francis will receive committee
questions through Bruce Szelest.
Daniel Truchan mentioned that high school students are required to take SAT and GRE tests and
may resent having to take another national test once reaching college.
Vice Provost Faerman mentioned a standard test is presented and faculty are informed the
national test is required. A problem exists where the University has not yet composed one exam
that covers both Math and Stats. Also, a combined Math and Stats test does not exist where
students are tested on what they have learned in class, and such a test would be very expensive.
Anne mentioned that the assessment would consist of 20% of a class. She stated that we need
answers on how the test is created and then compare the test to other institutions in their handling
of the test.
Dick Collier mentioned that around 650 SUNY courses could possibly be placed in 40 separate
categories. Vice Provost Faerman mentioned that the content in some courses would be the same
in certain levels.
A member mentioned the problem with math is that starting courses traditionally are those that
often stress application but do not emphasize understanding.
The question remains on whether a national exam can be developed.
Committee on Academic Freedom, Freedom of Expression, and Community Responsibility:
Professor Lawrence Snyder, Chair of the Committee on Academic Freedom, Freedom of
Expression, and Community Responsibility (CAFFECoR) discussed a proposed student
academic bill of rights, which will be presented to the Senate Executive Committee. The
committee initiated discussions last year on the issue. Professor Snyder mentioned the possible
creation of a website where students may state faculty grievances. A meeting in the Fall also
explored grievances other than grades. Professor Snyder mentioned that political indoctrination
is a problem. He mentioned a case at Columbia University where Israeli students complained of
not being treated equally. The resultant end was where many universities across the country
implemented a policy for student grievances. A familiar student complaint is when certain
courses are needed for graduation, are listed in the catalogue, but are not offered. Another
student concern was when students take ADD/ADHD drugs to stay focused on exams. It is
especially upsetting for students when the drugs are not prescribed to a particular student who
purchases them for the sole purpose of helping them concentrate while studying. Students
believe those students have an unfair advantage. According to students, plagiarism and other
UAC Minutes, 12/19/05
Page 3 of 4
forms of student cheating is not handled in the same manner for all students resulting in unequal
student treatment. The committee concluded it was important to have a location where students
may discuss their grievances privately without fear of faculty retribution. By having an
ombudsperson representing students, concerns would be forwarded to the administration and the
University Senate for possible action. The “academic bill of rights” will be presented at the
Senate meeting today at 3:30 PM. The question was raised as to whether the ombudsperson
would examine existing structures or cover other areas? Existing structures only would be
examined. Students would be insulated from both administration and faculty. Policies would be
developed after discussions with both administration and the affected department. For common
grievances, regularly accessed means will be followed. For grievances not fitting into a particular
pattern, we need to develop new mechanisms.
Would the ombudsperson have the authority to reprimand the affected faculty member? If a
faculty member has been given instructions to perform a certain task and does not do so, Vice
Provost Faerman has the authority to speak with the faculty’s Chair. If necessary, she could
submit a charge of insubordination with Human Resources.
Faculty must provide students with a course syllabus. Some students are hesitant to confront a
faculty member about a required syllabus, or other issues, due to possible faculty reprisal. This is
the reason the ombudsperson needs to work in an office that is independent and where students’
anonymity is protected.
One member raised the question of what remedy an individual student may be awarded for an
upheld grievance other than one about a grade. It was noted that ultimately the UAC's or GAC's
CAAS has the authority to change a grade and override the faculty's original grade.
Senior faculty would function in the ombudsperson capacity. Will the ombudsperson be a paid
professional or work in this capacity on a volunteer basis? If the former, who would pay for this
position?
Professor Snyder mentioned the website entitled ratemyprofessor.com where students are able to
post faculty names and comments. He mentioned an example where a student that posted
negative comments never approached the faculty member to discuss the matter. Such comments
place the University in a poor light and is worsened by the fact that the entire world can access
the website.
A Council member mentioned working at two previous institutions that had an ombudsperson to
assist students. One campus housed the ombudsperson in the administration office, and the
office’s duties were well publicized. The other school had a senior faculty member, who was
leaving teaching, that took the ombudsperson position. This school did not highly publicize the
availability of this student source. The Council member mentioned the need for students to go to
one place for assistance, speak to a live person possessing the knowledge in assisting students,
and not have the student sent to several different offices for assistance.
A suggestion was made to track all complaints. No Council members knew whether Binghamton
and other SUNY schools have this type of student assistance. Another suggestion was made to
have at least three people in the office in case a conflict of interest arises where one member
would need to abstain.
UAC Minutes, 12/19/05
Page 4 of 4
Vice Provost Faerman commented she does not believe the President will fund the proposal since
he previously turned down funding at the graduate level. However, if the office were staffed by
volunteers with working solutions, administration would probably not have an issue with it. One
member mentioned that the undergraduate level has a complex set of instructions and has many
committees assigned to review and make decisions regarding student grievances. We need to
utilize signs showing what to do and create a central place where the entire campus community is
able to access the information.
Is UPC involved in this issue? The UAC Chair will work with Joan Savitt, who chairs that
Council. The bill of rights and ombudsperson proposal will be presented at the Senate Executive
Committee today, as a motion, with a suggestion that UAC continue to review the proposal. It
was noted that courses not being listed and general requirements are both of interest to UPC. The
Chair mentioned that when he receives information via the Senate, he would inform Council
members.
Advisement Policy:
A member inquired of the latest status on the advisement policy since the Senate passed it. Vice
Provost Faerman mentioned that both she and Sheila Mahan are following up with
administration. A committee will be formed during the spring semester with 12-15 members,
including three from UAC.
New Business:
Dick Collier referred to three proposals included in today’s handout: (1) The proposed changes
to the Chemistry minor, (2) a request for Bulletin revisions from Dept. of Biological Sciences,
and (3) a proposal for a new minor in Globalization in the Americas. The three items will be
reviewed at Spring 2006 UAC meetings. If Council members have any questions or wish to have
Dick complete research on the subjects, please contact him.
Council Members’ Schedules:
For those members not yet submitting their Spring 2006 schedules, the Chair requested they be
forwarded to him.
GEAR Meeting:
Dick Collier mentioned he would be attending a GEAR meeting tomorrow. If any new
information is available regarding a Math rubric being developed, he will inform the Council.
Next Meeting:
The next Undergraduate Academic Council meeting will be held in January after the intersession break.
Minutes Taken:
Notes taken by Joanne Baronner, Undergraduate Studies.