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.