Agenda - UH Hilo Faculty Congress Meeting November 21, 2014 in the EKH Building, Room 127 Approval of minutes from the last meeting Faculty Congress Chair Report Committee Reports and Vote to Approve Committee Membership Assessment Support, Seri Luangphinith Academic Policy, James Beets Student Success and Admissions, Faith Mishina Budget Review, Roberta Barra Curriculum Review, Norbert Furumo General Education, Michael Bitter Program Review, Mitchell Anderson Ad Hoc Committee Reports Monthly Speaker Series, Emmeline de Pillis Standard Weekly Schedule Analysis Committee, Committee to be formed Other Committee with Faculty Congress Representation Prior Learning Assessment Committee, Faith Mishina EMIT Committee, Seri Luangphinith Sustainability Committee, Shih-Wu Sung Parking Committee, Adam Pack Rose Tseng Lecture Series, Jan Ray UNIV 101 Analysis Committee, Norbert Furumo Liaison Reports Curriculum, Jean Ippolito Professional Development, Jan Ray Distance Learning, Jan Ray WASC, Seri Luangphinith Faculty Senate Chair Updates CAS, Jean Ippolito CAFNRM, Mike Shintaku CoBE, Roberta Barra KHUOK, Iota Cabral Pharmacy, Andre Bachmann Library, Kathleen Stacey Old Business: Motion to Fast Track selected Minor Curriculum Changes: o 1st reading was Sept 19th, 2nd reading was October 17th o Motion was postponed (Jim Beets moved, Kim Furumo seconded, Vote: 16 approve /0 not approve/0 abstain) o See Attachment 1 Motion to include the Registrar’s office in the early curriculum review process rather than at the CCRC level. o 1st reading was October 17th o Motion was postponed (Jim Beets moved, Mitch Anderson seconded, Vote: 13 approve /0 not approve/3 abstain) o See Attachment 2 New Business Univ 101 Committee Recommendations (Emmeline dePillis), See Attachment 3 Motion to impartially track all foreign students in order to understand the poor retention rate of these students at UHH (Faith Mishina), See Attachment 4 APC Motion to establish a Faculty Development Committee (Jim Beets), See Attachment 5 APC Motion for an Academic Leadership Program (Jim Beets), See Attachment 6 Credit for Directed Study Courses (Jan Ray), See Attachment 7 Five Year Review, Faculty Forum (Jim Beets) Faculty Lounge Dedication – Wednesday Dec 10th, 9:30-11:30am, PB-9 Attachment 1 Motion: To Fast Track Selected Minor Curriculum Changes Whereas it can take as much as a year and a half or more for any curriculum changes to go through the curriculum review process. Whereas there are instances where minor modifications to curriculum are necessary, such as catalog corrections, course title or description clarifications, minor numbering or alpha changes, and prerequisite substitutions within departments. Whereas these changes are not substantive and do not require the entire review process, but rather a review by the Curriculum Coordinator and a representative from Faculty Congress. Therefore, it is recommended that a list of minor modifications to curriculum such as simple catalog corrections, course title or description clarifications, minor numbering or alpha changes, and prerequisite substitutions within departments (items that do not impact the structure of the existing course or program) be identified, documented, and submitted to the Campus-wide Curriculum Review Committee Chair of Faculty Congress to approve for fast tracking to the Registrar, rather than going through the entire curriculum review process. Attachment 2 Motion: For including the Registrar’s office in the early curriculum review process rather than at the CCRC level. Whereas, curriculum proposals and modification requests go through several levels of review before being reviewed by the Campus-wide Curriculum Review Committee of Faculty Congress, and then are sent back for alpha, numbering and syntax changes when there is not enough time for the proposer to make revisions before the Registrar’s final deadline. Whereas, it would be more appropriate for the Registrar’s delegate to make requests for alpha, numbering and syntax revisions at an earlier stage in the curriculum review process. Whereas, members of the Campus-wide Curriculum Review Committee may change yearly so that institutional history concerning process and method can be lost from year to year. Therefore, it is recommended, that the Registrar’s Office be included in the early reviews by the Curriculum Manager for catalog entry, formatting, syntax, numbering errors and conflicts, prior to submission to the CCRC level, and that a curriculum representative from Academic Affairs be invited as an exofficio member of the Faculty Congress Campus-wide Curriculum Review Committee to maintain the institutional memory of the curriculum process. Attachment 3 Motion: To require incoming freshman to take a one-credit UNIV 101 course WHEREAS the University wishes students to persist and succeed in their chosen degree programs, and WHEREAS the University wishes to impart the skills necessary for students to meet their goals, and WHEREAS enrollment in first year success courses such as UNIV 101 is associated, ceteris paribus, with significantly higher retention and graduation rates (see for example http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/lrngclas.htm), and WHEREAS the cost of providing a one-credit faculty-taught first year success course to all incoming freshmen, to be compensated at normal overload rates, would be less than the additional tuition revenue generated by retaining four in-state and two out-of-state students for one additional semester, Therefore, be it resolve that all incoming freshmen in the fall semester be placed into a section of UNIV 101, a one credit course offered on an overload basis by interested faculty. Attachment 4 Motion: To impartially track all foreign students in order to understand the poor retention rate of these students at UHH. Whereas the non-resident foreign LDT retention rate is only 8%, which is particularly significant since this group represents almost 29% of the LDT population Whereas foreign students only constitute 7% of the new student population each year, but account for 16% of the total attrition rate at UHH Whereas there are contradictory data and data inconsistencies in defining the foreign population in data searches (Incomplete data searches have been done only by interested parties.) Whereas in the 2013 WASC report, we have stated that we are unable to definitively identify the foreign students (because they enter by different means: the SAT, the TOEFL, by transfer or by political agreement) Whereas UHH admissions admits students as degree seeking whose TOEFL is 500 or less (Julie Mowrer and Mahealani Jones) Whereas UHH standards of TOEFL admissions falls significantly under that of most universities and go against academically accepted linguistic standards of measurement for student success Whereas there exists a very real phenomenon called Language Breakdown or Language Crash when the student’s whole scaffolding of language collapses because his or her language level cannot handle abstract reasoning, complex comparison, specialized vocabulary or hypothetical reasoning Whereas the abandonment of studies frequently accompanies the painful experience of Language Breakdown Therefore, in order to improve the very poor retention level of our foreign students, and respond to WASC’s criticism about our foreign student retention, the Faculty Congress requests the Administration to develop a tracking system for all students whose first language is not English in order to create a clear definition and measurement of our foreign students. Foreign students who enter by TOEFL scores, SAT scores, LDT or UDT and Pacific Islanders who enter because of the COPRA agreement need to be tracked, categorized and studied. We would request 1) the retention rate of the different groups, 2) tracking following the four categories of language proficiency— TOEFL 600+, 550-599, 500-549 and below 500, 3) an incorporation of SAT language scores into the TOEFL measurement of English competency, and 4) graduation rates of each group. Impartial data is strongly requested in order to better understand what we are doing wrong with our foreign students and to improve student retention rates. Attachment 5 MOTION: Establishment of the Faculty Development Committee and recommendation to approve the review of all information considered ‘faculty development’ presented by Faculty Congress and the UH Hilo Administration. WHEREAS, faculty development is a vital role within a healthy, functional university. WHEREAS, faculty development opportunities are provided by different sources within the university; Therefore, we propose establishment of the Faculty Congress Faculty Development Committee with the responsibilities of review and coordination of faculty development opportunities in collaboration with the Office of the VCAA office. The Faculty Development Committee will follow the responsibilities approved by Faculty Congress and maintain an updated notice of faculty development opportunities. Attachment 6 MOTION: Recommendation to approve the Academic Leadership Development Program. Background: Several universities have leadership development programs that provide faculty opportunities to learn about roles and responsibilities of faculty leaders as department chairs, committee chairs, and other aspects of university service. We propose to develop a program that is modeled after successful programs. Program elements will be reviewed and discussed with the VCAA and be presented for Faculty Congress review and input. WHEREAS, an important component of faculty development is leadership development, which is vital to adequate academic functions and operations within a university; Therefore, we propose an Academic Leadership Development Program that is managed jointly by Faculty Congress and the Office of the VCAA. The management of the Academic Leadership Program with be a collaboration between the Faculty Development Committee and the Office of the VCAA.