February 14, 2013
Present: Bartlett, Caswell, Christ, Clayton, Coon, Hays, Iqbal, Licari, Pohl, St. Clair, Terlip
Absent: Power, Roberts (for Milambiling), Schmitz, Waldron, Zhbanova
Guests: Pam MacKay, Debra Rich, Susie Schwieger, Diane Wallace
The meeting was called to order by Chair Clayton. Motion by Pohl to approve the minutes of the January 24, 2013 meeting; seconded by Bartlett. Motion approved.
Clayton noted that Coon was delayed at another meeting and would arrive as soon as that meeting concluded.
Terlip noted that it had come to the attention of the Intercollegiate Academics Fund committee that some faculty were sharing hotel rooms with students when traveling on university related business; the committee wants to remind the faculty that this could be considered inappropriate.
Clayton mentioned that the welcome reception for President-elect Ruud will be held from 4-6 p.m. on February 28. She said there is a possibility that the Graduate Council meeting that is set during that time frame may need to be rescheduled or shortened; she will keep the Council informed.
Graduate College Reports – Licari reported that on Monday, February 11, the University Faculty Senate approved the Women’s and Gender Studies curricular restatements. The next step would be for Licari to take the matter back to the Board of Regents. This would not be because the Board reviews curricular restatements, but because the program has been suspended in terms of admitting and recruiting new students. Licari will bring the issue forward at the March 13, Board of Regents Meeting. He said that the GCCC will be considering the Technology MS and Doctor of Technology curriculum packets. If the February 28 meeting were rescheduled, the Council would need to meet no later than March 7, since the Faculty Senate meeting takes place on March 11.
Licari mentioned the welcome reception for Bill Ruud and added that he was encouraged by some very positive remarks Ruud has made in terms of his commitment to graduate education and being innovative in graduate education at a comprehensive university.
Related to allocations for stipends and scholarships, Licari said he would be finishing up with those materials later in the evening.
Following Licari’s report, Clayton introduced Eric St. Clair, who replaced Allison Witt as the Masters’ Student representative on the Council. Eric is a second-year Public Policy student who is also on the Graduate Student Advisory Board and one of the three graduate student representatives on the NISG. Clayton thanked St. Clair for agreeing to serve on the Council.
Schwieger reminded the Council that the Graduate Student Symposium will be held on April 4. The deadline for students to submit their registration materials is March 1. Susie thanked those on the Council who have invited her to speak to students in their classes about the symposium. Schwieger has also started CV and resume review hours in the Union from 2:00 to 4:00 on Tuesdays and Wednesdays continuing through the semester. Also coming up will be resume writing workshops and an informational workshop for students interested in looking at doctoral programs. Clayton asked if the informational meeting related to doctoral programs would be appropriate for some undergraduate students as well. Activities are being planned for Graduate Student Appreciation Week, which is April 1 through 5.
Pohl thanked Hays for his Brown Bag presentation that was held on January 31. The next presentation will be by Xavier Escandell on February 20 in the Presidential Room.
Discussion and Vote on Policy Regarding a Student’s Eligibility for a Graduate Assistantship When the Student Has Grades of Incomplete (I) for the Previous Semester
As a result of the discussion at the last Council meeting, Clayton presented a draft Request for Consideration for a Graduate Assistantship for Graduate Students with Grades of Incomplete form. Implementation of this type of form would help Coon make a more accurate determination of how to proceed when considering assistantships when one or several Incompletes are involved. MacKay mentioned that in addition to Incompletes, there is the issue of blank grades when no grade was submitted. Blank grades could be due to a faculty member not submitting a grade and may be for a single student or in some cases a whole class. Regarding a possible assistantship and blank grades, Iqbal said that if the faculty member hasn’t submitted a grade, there should be a mechanism to deal with that and if there is an Incomplete, it would need to be determined whether or not the student is making a plan to complete the class. Licari said that from an administrative point of view, it would be best to stay consistent by using the same policy when dealing with Incompletes and blank grades that is used in considering whether or not to place a student on probation or suspension. The assumption implicitly is that the Incomplete/blank grade will be sufficiently high to avoid putting the student on probation or suspension. This would be consistent with how the University currently operates and does not make a new assumption. It also protects the student from the negligence of a faculty member who fails to put a grade in, and protects the student because the assumption is that the student is eligible rather than ineligible.
Hays made a motion to follow the current Graduate College Academic Discipline Policy (Suspension and Probation) when dealing with Incompletes and/or blank grades; seconded by Bartlett. Motion passed unanimously.
Discussion and Vote on Curriculum Packet from Curriculum and Instruction, Literacy Program
ii. Reading Recovery Teacher Leader Preparation Program – Reading Recovery Teacher Leader Certificate (new certificate) – Debra Rich, with the Richard O. Jacobson Center for Comprehensive Learning, and the Reading Recovery Center of Iowa. Rich noted that at this point, the Reading Recovery Teacher Leader is an 18-hour post-Masters program; the desire would be for the program to be a Program of Study leading to a certificate. Clayton clarified that these are 18 hours of existing coursework, so there are no new courses being proposed and no additional resources being used; just the creation of a certificate out of existing courses. The program expects to have five students and it is anticipated that there will be a preparation cohort in the near future. It was noted that people are already taking the classes they are just not receiving a certificate.
Pohl made a motion to approve the Reading Recovery Teacher Leader Certificate Program proposal; seconded by Bartlett. Motion passed unanimously.
i. Partnerships in Comprehensive Literacy (PCL): Literacy Coach Preparation Program – Literacy Coach Certificate (new certificate) – The 21-credit certificate includes two new courses which have been taught under the 6289 course number. Wallace indicated that as that is a common course number, at the GCCC level it was recommended that the courses be renumbered. Clayton said that her understanding from Coon was that the whole packet could not be voted on for approval today because of the two proposed courses, LITED 7310 and LITED 7320, that need the College of Education Senate approval. However, the general concept of the packet could be endorsed.
After extensive discussion about possible options for awarding the certificate to the current cohort and about the possibility of students earning both the Reading Recovery and Literacy Coach Certificates, Hays made a motion to endorse the Literacy Coach Preparation Certificate Program, pending approval of the new courses LITED 7310 and LITED 7320; seconded by Bartlett. Motion passed unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 4:39 p.m.
The next meeting is scheduled to take place on Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 3:30 p.m. in Lang 115.