January 27, 1994
Present: Chao, Crew, Decker, Gaies, Huddleston, V. Jackson, Lew, Safford, Simet, Somervill, Walker, Yohe
Absent: Durham, Kirmani, MacArthur, R. Martin
Visitors: Nancy Marlin (Vice President and Provost); Barbara Lounsberry (English Language and Literature); Susann Doody (College of Education); Donald Schmits (Educational Psychology and Foundations)
Minutes #824 and #825 were approved as published.
Somervill asked that a future agenda include a discussion of the comprehensive exam requirement. The current policy is that all students are to take a comprehensive exam. However, some departments use the thesis defense for this and some have a comprehensive test. We should discuss whether we want to retain the requirement or leave the decision to the departments. Somervill announced that a committee of Gaies, Lew and himself were considering recommendations on enhancing the quality of graduate programs and asked if Gaies and Lew could be designated as representatives of the Council to make the final determinations which would be forwarded. Crew moved that they be appointed. Motion was seconded. After discussion of the recommendations, the motion was withdrawn. Somervill said that one focus of the recent audit was conflict of interest. The other two state universities each have a conflict of interest policy, but we don't. He has been asked to look at the issue and said that he felt we needed a policy to avoid any appearance of conflict of interest. He has been looking at Iowa City's policy, which he has approval for UNI to use, but has recently learned that it will be revised because of changes in federal guidelines. Somervill will review the policy with Tim McKenna. It was noted that having the same policy would make jointly funded research with Iowa City easier. Crew moved to use the same policy as Iowa City--their current one for now and the revised one when it is completed. Motion was seconded and passed.
Lounsberry gave a brief summary of the old undergraduate academic grievance policy and said that it was revised because it was ambiguous and lead to misunderstandings. The new policy streamlined the process and has been endorsed by both the Educational Policy Committee and UNI Student Government. Decker moved to adopt the revised graduate academic grievance procedure. Motion was seconded. Somervill noted that only one graduate grievance has completed the entire grievance process. Jackson said that the process of forming the graduate academic appeals panel is very cumbersome and needs to be revised. Lounsberry noted that the Faculty Senate appoints the undergraduate committee. Crew suggested selecting the members in a manner similar to jury selection--keep a pool of people and select the panel from that pool when one is needed. After some discussion, it was decided to determine the panel selection process at a later meeting. Lounsberry distributed copies of the undergraduate grievance form. After discussion resulting in a few more revisions in the document, the motion to adopt the revised graduate academic grievance procedure passed. Somervill will bring copies of the document incorporating all of the revisions to the next meeting. Jackson will review the undergraduate form and bring a suggested graduate form to the next meeting. Somervill will transmit the revised document to Marlin for submission to the Cabinet.
Simet asked that suggestions for the Graduate Dean evaluation be returned quickly. A committee will then be appointed to look at the suggestions and determine a final evaluation document. This committee will be composed of Simet, a Graduate Council member, a member of the Regular Graduate Faculty, and a merit employee.
Simet announced that the committee to determine programs for enhancement will be reporting at the next meeting.
Crew moved to adjourn. Motion was seconded and passed. Meeting adjourned at 5:25 p.m.
Mary Ann Hesse
Next meeting will be February 10 at 3:30 p.m. in Seerley 3.