Graduate Council Minutes 4/9/14
GBB 205, 12:10-1:00 p.m.
Members Present: M. Alwell D. Campbell, X. Chu, I. Crummy, N. Hassanein, A. Kinch, M. Kia, A.
McKeown, S. Sprang, E. Stone, K. Swift
Members Absent/Excused: M. Berthelson,, D. Biehl, L. Gray, B. Klaasen, S. Williams
Ex Officio Members Present: R. Arouca, B. Brown, N. Hinman, S. Ross
The minutes from March 26th were approved and the meeting began with the UM minute.
Communication:

Dean Ross was informed by the Provost that the Interdisciplinary Program Director
position is temporarily on hold. The interim position will end at the end of the spring
semester.
Business Items:

The Council considered and approved the two documents from the IIP Oversight
Committee (appended below). There was concern about the possible loss of the Program
Director position that is referenced in the procedure. There is now protocol in place for
collecting the data for the annual progress report. This function has been the
responsibility of the IIP Oversight Committee Chair in the past.
Several Council members agreed that Blakely Brown, Interim IIP Director, and Raquel
Arouca, Graduate School Fellow efforts to improve the operation of the IIP program
should be recognized.

The Council considered the draft letter to the Provost. There were minor changes, but the
document was not given final approval before the meeting ended. It was suggested that
additional language be added to invite the Provost to another meeting to continue the
discussion of a vision for graduate education and the future of the MIS and IIP, given
there will be no Director next year. If possible the document should be revised and
approved electronically.

Further discussion regarding the Council’s role should continue after Bertha Morton’s are
approved.
The meeting was adjourned at 1:05 p.m.
Procedure:
IIP Oversight Committee Procedures
Date Adopted: 5/4/06
Last Revision: 4/9/14
References:
Approved by:
Graduate Council
A. Oversight Committee
The Oversight Committee is composed of Graduate Council doctoral program faculty. In concert
with the Graduate School’s Director of Interdisciplinary Studies, the committee provides
oversight of the IIP Program and provides consultative guidance to the IIP Admissions
Committee.
B. Annual review by the Oversight Committee
1. Progress for each IIP student who is currently enrolled in the program will be reviewed annually
late in the Spring semester;
2. Using the format specified by the Director of Interdisciplinary Studies, students are required to
complete and submit a formal on-line “Progress Report” by the second week of April.
a) This report will be submitted to the Director of Interdisciplinary Studies and will indicate each
student’s progress in his/her program (e.g., number of completed credits, number of
currently enrolled credits, explicit description of progress regarding dissertation activities,
anticipated dissertations and program completion dates), as well as an overview of the
student’s relevant professional activities.
b) Each student’s dissertation chairperson will be required to review and indicate his/her
approval of the student’s progress report prior to its submission.
c) Approved reports will be compiled by the Director of Interdisciplinary Studies.
3. Using the Progress Reports as the data source, the Graduate School and the Director of
Interdisciplinary Studies will draft and submit to the IIP Oversight Committee a Program Review of
the IIP. This review will constitute a written summary of each student’s progress and
accomplishments within the IIP.
a) The Program Review will serve as evidence of whether the IIP as a whole is meeting its goals.
b) The Program Review should include notice of students who are failing to make substantive
progress toward program completion. The review should include a general description of the
circumstances for students who have fallen behind as well as a general description of how
their progress is lacking. The review should also document whether or not the students and
their committees have developed remediation plans to support students’ progress. Specific
details of each student’s circumstances and remediation plan will not be contained in the
Program Review. Instead, these details would be discussed thoroughly with the
Interdisciplinary Graduate Program Director, the IIP students’ committees, and the
committee chairpersons.
c) The IIP Oversight Committee will review the Program Review and provide a brief oral
description of the IIP’s annual status at the final Graduate Council meeting of each academic
year. The IIP Oversight Committee and/or the Graduate Council will use the Program Review
to identify questions or concerns about the IIP. Questions and concerns will be addressed to
the Interdisciplinary Graduate Program Director. The Program Director and the IIP Oversight
Committee will work together to address the concerns.
4. Consultative Functions:
Finally, the IIP Oversight Committee will serve a consultative function for the Director of
Interdisciplinary Studies and the Chair of the IIP Admissions Committee. For example, the IIP
Oversight Committee is available to consult with the Director of Interdisciplinary Studies about
issues that may arise regarding a student’s unsatisfactory progress or issues of disagreement
between a student, his/her committee, and/or his/her chair. Ultimately, per typical Graduate
School operating procedure, responsibility for decisions regarding student complaints and
resolution of disagreements among committee members will rest with the Dean of the Graduate
School.
Proposed policy language regarding procedure for substantive changes made by students to approved
Interdisciplinary Doctoral Programs
The process to approve major, substantive revisions to an IIP student’s original Individualized
Interdisciplinary Doctoral Program (IIP) is as follows:
The IIP is housed in the Graduate School and does not have a specific department. Thus, the student’s
IIP committee serves as his or her department. The Director of Interdisciplinary Graduate Programs
oversees the IIP, and serves in the role of department chair with support from the IIP Admissions
Committee, the IIP Oversight Committee, and, when needed, the Dean of the Graduate School. Upon
admission into the program, the student’s prospective committee becomes the official acting committee
(i.e., the “department”). This committee is responsible for directing the student’s program and
committing their time and effort to mentor and guide the student through program and degree
completion.
If an IIP student makes substantive changes to his or her IIP program (e.g., original research plan, scope
of work, timeline, comprehensive examination format, or committee member composition), a formal
review and approval process of the revised IIP must occur. The Graduate School (which is the
responsible academic unit) must approve of the proposed changes. The formal approval process can
occur through one of two different courses of action; the student can choose which course of action.
Course of Action #1: The IIP student convenes the current committee (i.e., the committee approved by
the IIP Admissions committee and recognized by the Graduate School) and presents to them the
proposed revisions to the IIP. Specifically, this presentation should include:
1)
A brief summary of the revised research plan, including methodology. If the student is
proposing revisions to the IIP committee (i.e., the ‘department’) the student must explain
how revisions will successfully contribute to the revised research plan and degree
completion.
2)
Present a revised timeline, showing coursework completed and any new courses that might
be needed to meet the goals of the revised research plan and any changes in committee
member composition.
3)
Describe any changes to the comprehensive exam format that was originally agreed upon.
After the presentation, the student will be excused, and the committee members will discuss the
students’ proposed revisions to the IIP. After this discussion, the student will be informed of whether
the current proposal is acceptable as submitted or require minor changes. If major changes are
required, the revisions will need to be reviewed, evaluated and approved by all members of the
student’s current committee. All documents prepared for this meeting will be kept on record in the
student’s file at the Graduate School.
If the changes do not implicate committee membership, members of the existing committee will
indicate their approval verbally during the meeting. If the approved changes include new committee
members, these new members will be required to write letters of commitment and submit them to the
Graduate School. These letters should mirror in scope and format the letters submitted by prospective
committee members at the time of the student’s original application to the IIP. As noted in the
application guidelines, the letters must, “…include a statement about the value and rigor of the
student's proposal, [the committee members’] willingness to participate in the collaborative effort and
[the committee members’] specific areas of expertise and how this strengthens the student’s IIP
program of study and dissertation project(s)” (see PhD Individualized Interdisciplinary Doctoral Program, item
3.13, “Establishing a Program Committee”:
http://www.umt.edu/grad/Interdisciplinary%20Graduate%20Programs/Prospective%20Students.php) . These
letters will be kept with the student’s file.
Course of Action #2: The IIP student prepares a new IIP application that includes the revisions to the
research plan, course of study, comprehensive exam format, timeline and committee member makeup
and submits this to the IIP Admissions Committee. The application can and should include relevant
coursework and research activities that the student had already completed in the course of his or her
original plan. The application submission deadlines are November 15 and April 1, each academic year.
The IIP Admissions Committee will review the application and decide to fully approve, provisionally
approve, or deny the student admission into the IIP.