COLLEGE SENATE BULLETIN

State University of New York at Geneseo

College of Arts and Sciences

 

 

Bulletin No. 9

            Pages 93-113

            June 30, 2012

 

 

Faculty Personnel Committee Report for 2012                                 113

 

Minutes of the Faculty Affairs Committee

14 February 2012

 

Present:  J. McLean (Chair), J. Allen, S Derné, V. Farmer, C. Filice, R. Kahrs,

D McPherson, A. Sheldon, H. Waddy, T. Buggie-Hunt (guest)

 

Call to Order

James McLean called the meeting to order at 4:05 PM.

 

1.     Chair’s Report:  James McLean received thanks from Provest Long for the FAC memo providing suggestions on constituting a committee to advise the provost on new faculty lines.  While the provost did not accept the suggestion that FAC serve as this committee, she did agree with the principles outlined in our memo that the committee be formed in compliance with the democratic representative functions of College  Senate, perhaps by having representatives from each of the Senate committees. McLean also noted that the department chairs’ requests for new faculty lines are due to the provost in mid-March 2012.  Finally, the SOFI response rate last semester was only 31.8%, which merits additional FAC discussion.

 

2.     Old Business:  Attendees revised the second memo to Provost Long regarding faculty advice on new faculty lines, focusing on the types of information that will be needed to be effective.  There was general agreement on the need for information on departments’ numbers of faculty (both full-time and adjunct) and numbers of students taught.  At Derné’s suggestion, added “some measure of unmet demand in recent semesters for each department.”  Sheldon, Waddy and others raised concern about teaching responsibilities beyond traditionally scheduled courses, leading to the addition, “Amount of supervision of students in transformational learning outside of traditional courses, as reflected in directed studies, honors theses, research and internship supervision, etc.”  Discussion on the general tone of the memo (raised by McPherson) and the relationship of the proposed committee to the coordination of faculty lines with the mission of the college (raised by Allen, Derné, and others) led to changes indicating that the proposed advisory committee should have a limited role in specifying which positions would best further the mission of the college, and that guidance from the provost would be required regarding her interpretations and emphases in how best to use new faculty lines to serve that mission.  McLean will distribute the revised second memo to the FAC members.

 

3.     New Business:

Minutes of FAC meeting on 17 January 2012 were approved.

McLean suggested that FAC add a meeting, since many items remain on our agenda.

 

Adjournment

James McLean adjourned the meeting at 5:02 PM.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Victoria Farmer

 

 

Minutes of the Faculty Affairs Committee

March 7, 2012

 

Present: J. McLean (Chair), J. Allen, S. Derne, B. Evans, V. Farmer, D. McPherson, l. O’Brien, A. Sheldon, R. Kahrs (student), Tabitha Buggie-Hunt (guest, Dean’s Office).

 

Call to Order

McLean called the meeting to order at 4:07 PM.

 

1.     Chair’s Report:

A)    McLean reported that four FAC committee members attended the Thursday meeting two weeks ago and a list of concerns regarding the SOFIs were identified for FAC to consider.  Also drafted were suggestions for the H-form.

B)    McLean reported that the Provost, as reported to Department Chairs, is interested in an evaluation system for part-time faculty.  McLean has requested that FAC be involved.  There was minor discussion about the value versus practicality of such an instrument for long-term and short-term part-time positions.  FAC anticipates further discussion at a future meeting.

C)    McLean reported that three members of FAC (J. Allen, B. Evans, and D. McPherson) have volunteered to serve on the 15-member faculty committee charged with advising the Provost on faculty lines to be filled within the next few years.  The names will be forwarded to Dennis Showers and the Provost for selection.

 

2.     Old Business

A)    H-form: 

a.     Discussion of the H-form had been tabled from the November, 2011 FAC meeting.  Under consideration was the addition of a third rating, “meets expectations with special commendation” to each of the three categories.  Discussion centered on what value this option would provide.  A concern was raised that adding this rating would eventually generate the condition that a candidate must achieve a number of these rankings to be awarded continuing appointment or promotion.  The point was made that the H-form was initiated by two previous committees that each decided upon a two-ranking system, and that the FPC had opportunities to express their concerns earlier in the process.  A concern was raised that allowing the Senate’s decision to be returned to FAC because of FPCs involvement after-the-vote undermines the Senate process.  The concern was raised that the H-form may not be implemented without accommodating FPC concerns.  A vote was taken on adding this ranking:  did not pass.

b.     The FAC sub-group proposed adding a third recommendation option to the H-form, “recommend with reservation.”  The rationale for this was to provide an option for recommending faculty who, for example, might not meet the expectations for all three categories.  Discussion of situations in which this option might be used, or not used, ensued.  A vote was taken on adding this recommendation option: vote passed (5:1).

c.      A motion was made to recommend No Change to the existing H-form and explain the rationale to the Provost in an accompanying note.  Included, however, in that note would be optional language for additional ranking (see (b) above) if the Provost insists upon altering the form.  Motion was seconded and a vote was taken.  It passed (3:2:2).

B)    SOFIs

a.     It was proposed that the policies regarding the SOFIs should be provided to the faculty at the time the SOFIs are administered.  At present, a list of suggestions is provided to the faculty, but the “rules” are not.  When the SOFIs were administered on paper, they were always accompanied with a document that outlined the College’s policies regarding them.  That document has not been in use since the SOFIs went online. J. Rao located and provided a copy of the policy document to Chair McLean.

b.     It was suggested that a prompt be added to the conclusion of each SOFI that states the faculty member’s name for whom the SOFI belongs and requests that the student completing the SOFI type that faculty members name into a comment box.  A comparison of the faculty name to the student-typed name could then identify SOFIs completed for the incorrect faculty member.  Concerns were raised regarding how effective this method would be, and the probability of false-negatives due to typing errors.  No motion was made on this suggestion.

c.      Discussion focused on the validity of the SOFIs in evaluating faculty instruction, particularly with the poor response rate at present (~32%).  It was noted that the SOFI response rate has been declining since moving to the online format.  Several committee members noted the challenges they experienced in attempting to use the SOFIs to evaluate faculty for continuing promotion and tenure, and the importance of having a valid mechanism to do so.  The question was raised as to whether holds on student grades can be used to compel students to complete the SOFIs.  T. Buggie-Hunt reported that was not an option.  Questions were also raised about the desirability of using such methods.  Forcing students to complete SOFIs just in order to register would increase the response rate, but might/would encourage thoughtless responses.  Concerns were also raised about using positive incentives such as extra credit.

d.     S. Derne proposed a motion to discontinue the use of the SOFIs in the evaluation of faculty.  J. Allen seconded the motion.  Several amendments were made to the original language.  The resulting motion passed FAC by a unanimous vote:

 

“Whereas response rates to online SOFIS are inadequate and unrelated to attendance

Whereas non-attending students who cannot evaluate class can respond to online SOFIs

Whereas online SOFI response rates vary greatly

Whereas the online SOFI system has sometimes been unreliable

Whereas students fill out SOFIs in a non-uniform time and manner

Therefore, FAC recommends that neither online SOFI numbers nor comments be used in the evaluation of faculty.”

 

Adjournment

James McLean adjourned the meeting at 5:08 PM.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Amy Sheldon

 

 

 

Minutes of the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee

March 20, 2012

 

Present:  R. Vasiliev (Chair), K. Becker, S. Russell, B. Harrison, R. Coloccia, G. Marcus, P. Pacheco, J. McGarrah, S.A. Brainard, E. Schoene

Guests:  D. Aagesen, S. Iyer

 

Call to Order

R. Vasiliev called the meeting to order at 4:00 PM.

1. NEW COURSES
   

ARTH 160 Motion passed unanimously

ENVR 250 Motion passed unanimously

Adjournment

R. Vasiliev adjourned the meeting at 4:06 PM.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Sue Ann Brainard

 

College Senate Meeting Minutes

April 3, 2012

Present:  B. Bareeqah, I. Alam, J. Allen, S. Carroll, S. Derne, L. Dougherty, B. Evans, V. Farmer, C. Filice, K. Fletcher, C. Filice, K. Fletcher, D. Granger, C. Haddad, G.  Hartvigsen, A. Heap, S. Iyer, H. Jeong, J. Katz, C. Kreutter, J. Lovett, D. Mackenzie, G. Marcus, V. Markowski, M. McCormick, J. McGarrah, P. McLaughlin, J. McLean, J. Miller, M. Mitschow, M. Mooney, l. O’Brien, T. Ocon, J. Okada, P. Pacheco, S. Peck, D. Repinski, D. Rescott, S. Salmon, E. Schoene, A. Sheldon, D. Showers (Chair), D. Simmons, S. Stubblefield, A. Tajima, D. Tamarin, R. Vasiliev, R., H. Waddy, J. Williams, A. Yauney

 

Call to Order

D. Showers (Chair) called the meeting to order at 4:00 PM                                                                            

 

Adoption of the Agenda

Agenda was adopted without objection

 

Adoption of the Minutes

Minutes of February 28, 2012 were adopted without objection or correction

                                                                                   

President’s Report, Christopher Dahl

Good discussions around campus with Middle States personnel

o   High Standard One: Mission Statement

o   High Standards Ten, Eleven: Faculty & Staff

  NYS Budget

o   Provide $69 million additional to SUNY

o   $27. 8 million to SUNY hospitals

o   Passed funding for 3 SUNY Challenge grants to non-university centers

o   $300.00 tuition increase

§  25% off top for TAP

 

Provost’s Report, Carol Long

Thank you to accreditation team, sustainability team, and advisory committee

Thank you to those encouraging students to apply for student ambassadorship

Reminder:  April 17 is Great Day

 

Chair, Dennis Showers

Vice Chair, Jim Williams

·       No report

Past-Chair, David Granger

·       Language for Constitution will be presented to Senate next meeting

Secretary, Cheryl Kreutter

·       No report

Treasurer, Aaron Steinhauer

·       No report

University Faculty Senator, Gregg Hartvigsen

·       No report

Vice President, Student Assoc., Tyler Ocon

 SA elections completed

o   President: Carly Annable

o   Vice President: Justin Shapiro

o   Director of Business Affairs: Casey Howard

o   Director of Inter-Residence Affairs: Silvia Roma

o   Director of Student Affairs: Sadie Baker

o   Director of Public Relations: Forrest Regan

o   Director of Student Programming: Matthew Bower

o   Director of Academic Affairs: Dara Gell

Undergraduate Curricula,  Ren Vasiliev

 UCC Proposed for Second Reading

(All proposals are available at: \\files\outbox\DeanOfCollege\doc\ucc)

o   Motion to accept: Course Deletions

ANTH 232, ANTH 306, ANTH 335, ANTH 392

GEOG 120, GEOG 240, GEOG 379, GEOG 381, GEOG 391

o   Motion carried.

o   Motion to accept: Course Revisions

ANTH 201, ANTH 204, ANTH 270, ANTH 283

COMN 275

GEOG 230, GEOG 261, GEOG 274, GEOG 291, GEOG 340, GEOG 370, GEOG 377, GEOG 382, GEOG 385, GEOG 386

GSCI 331

MATH 213, MATH 221, MATH 233, MATH 333

o   Motion carried.

o   Motion to accept: New Courses

GEOG 161, GEOG 220, GEOG 259, GEOG 262, GEOG 263, GEOG 265, GEOG 266, GEOG 275, GEOG 278, GEOG 286, GEOG 331, GEOG 333, GEOG 352, GEOG 387, GEOG 397

o   Motion carried.

o   Motion to accept: Program Revisions

ANTHROPOLOGY B.A.

ANTHROPOLOGY Writing Requirement

BIOCHEMISTRY B.S.

GEOGRAPHY B.A.

GEOGRAPHY Minor

URBAN STUDIES Minor

o   Motion carried.

 

UCC Proposed for First Reading:

All proposals are available at: \\files\outbox\DeanOfCollege\doc\ucc

o   Motion to accept: Course Deletions

PLSC 220: Failed States

o   Motion carried.

o   Motion to accept:New Courses

ARTH 160: African American Art History Survey

ENVR 250: Urban Environmental Issues in Latin America

ENVR 268: Landscapes and Livelihoods in Central

Appalachia

FREN 375: French-Canadian Literature

GEOG 269: Geographic Field Studies in Western Canada

GERM 318: Advanced Grammar and Composition

PLSC 351: Failed States

XLRN 201: Real World Geneseo

BIOL 216: Biology Second Year Laboratory

o   Motion carried.

o   Motion to accept: Program Revisions

International Relations B.A.

o   Motion carried.

 

Undergraduate Policies, Jeff Over                                  

            Second Reading of #1 - Academic Standards Policy

 

 Policy Committee proposes the changes to Academic Probation shown below (italics are insertions, strike-through are deletions)

 

Academic Probation (p. 34 in Bulletin)

Full time students are reviewed for academic probation at the end of each semester. Students will be placed on probation if they fail to complete a satisfactory number of hours in two successive semesters, in any given semester and/ or if their cumulative GPA falls below 2.00.  These students will receive probation letters from the Dean of Curriculum and Academic Services. The letter will also recommend that the student take such actions as seeking advisement or counseling and reviewing work schedules. Students placed on academic probation will be required to receive advisement before registration. Students on probation must make satisfactory progress in their next semester or they will be dismissed (i.e., two consecutive probationary semesters will subject students to dismissal proceedings). Unless otherwise stipulated by the Academic Standards Committee  Dean of Curriculum and Academic Services  or otherwise noted in this Bulletin,  students on probation are not precluded from participation in college-sponsored co-curricular activities.

 

o   Discussion.

 

o   Motion: Refer “Academic Probation” back to committee. Seconded.

o   Motion carried.

 

Academic Dismissal (p. 34 Bulletin)

Students are reviewed for academic dismissal at the end of each semester. Students will be dismissed after two consecutive semesters on probation. Dismissed students are no longer eligible to continue at the College and will be denied further registration. Notification of dismissal is sent by mail and email to the student’s address on record with the College, at the end of the semester in question. Each student is responsible for informing the College through the Office of Records and Scheduling of updates and changes to his/her address.

 

#2 - Second Degree Policy

 

Based on SUNY guidelines from 1986 for Dual Degree policy, Policy Committee proposes:

 

When a student concurrently meets the requirements of more than one option or major within a single broad field of study, a single degree should be awarded rather than two separate degrees. (This does not preclude transfer arrangements under which coursework is completed at another institution toward a professional degree and transferred back for completion of a degree at the initial campus.)  Programs which lead to two different academic objectives may result in the awarding of two degrees, provided the requirements of each program have been met; and at least 30 credit hours of coursework beyond the single degree requirement has been completed.  No more than 12 hours of credit, if any, can be allowed to overlap between the two programs.  At the graduate level, at least 30 credit hours of additional study must be undertaken for the attainment of two degrees at the same level.  Application for the second degree is through the readmission process (described in the section titled “Readmission” in the Bulletin).  Readmission to pursue a second degree is not guaranteed.  Applications will be reviewed by the Dean of Curriculum and Academic Services in consultation with the relevant academic departments or programs.

 

#3 - Eliminate 2.00 minimum GPA in related area requirements. (Minimum Competence on p. 39 in Bulletin)

 

Policy Committee proposes:

Achieve at least a 2.00 cumulative average in all courses in the major department applied toward completion of the major, and a 1.67 average or better in required related courses (i.e., any courses required by the major department which are outside the academic discipline of the major).

 

#4 - Change of Grade Policy

 

Policy Committee proposes:

All changes of grades must be made within twelve weeks of the start of the semester following the semester in which the original grade was awarded.  Changes are limited to error or miscalculation; all other changes must follow the grade appeal process and be initiated by the student prior to the end of the fourth week of the semester following the term in which the grade was received.   

 

#5 - Wording of College Mission to reflect importance of transformational learning experiences in Geneseo education – courtesy of Kurt Fletcher and committee on Undergraduate Research and Transformational Learning

 

Proposed Version:

SUNY Geneseo, nationally recognized as a center of excellence in undergraduate education, is a public liberal arts college with selected professional and master's level programs. It combines a rigorous curriculum, transformational learning experiences, and a rich co-curricular life to create a learning-centered environment. The entire college community works together to develop socially responsible citizens with skills and values important to the pursuit of an enriched life and success in the world.

 

Graduate Academic Affairs, Susan Salmon                              

GCC Proposes for First Reading:

            All proposals are available at: \\files\outbox\DeanOfCollege\doc\gcc\Academic Year 2011-2012

 

o   Motion to accept, New Courses

CURR 5xx: Multiliteracies: Integration of Multiliteracies in Inclusive Adolescence Education

EDUC 4XX/5XX:  Literacy and Language Development in English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL)

INTD 5XX: Teaching Mathematics in the Inclusive Classroom– Grades 7-12

SPED 406: Applied Behavior Analysis

SPED 420: Instructional Strategies and Inquiry in Inclusive Adolescent Education 

SPED 5XX: Capstone Seminar- Inclusive Adolescent Education

SPED 5XX: Student Teaching Internship- Inclusive Adolescent Education

o   Motion carried.

o   Motion to accept, New Programs

Master of Science in Adolescence Mathematics Education with Special Education Certification

o   Motion carried.

 

Student Affairs, Dan Repinski                           

            The committee moves the following resolutions related to sexual assault issues:

 

#1  Program Funding

Presently:  There are no designated funding sources for the education and prevention efforts of the Advisory Committee on Campus Security (ACCS) and other participating College offices. 

 

Motion:  The Senate recommends to the President that he support funding for efforts which seek to (1) prevent sexual assault at Geneseo, and (2) educate faculty, staff, and students about resources and options available to those who have experienced sexual assault. The Senate SAC will seek to update with the President regarding status of this issue in fall 2012.

 

o   Motion carried.

 

#2  Transportation Funding

Presently:  The College does not offer to transport to Strong Memorial Hospital medically-stable students who seek a forensic evaluation by a Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner following the experience of sexual assault.

 

Motion:  The Senate recommends to the President that he support the development and funding of a service whereby medically-stable students who seek a forensic evaluation by a Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner following the experience of sexual assault are assisted by the College with transportation to Strong Memorial Hospital. We urge that this be implemented prior to the start of fall 2012 or sooner.

 

o   Motion carried.

 

#3  Administrative Structure and Procedures

Presently:  The organization and procedures of the College response to sexual assault warrants review:

-there appears to be a lack of coordination and communication among those offices responsible; and

-there appears to be no coordinated and systematized data collection and record-keeping protocol.

 

Motion:  The Senate recommends to the President that the organization and procedures of the College sexual assault response effort be reviewed. We urge that the following be considered and implemented prior to the start of fall 2012 or sooner:

-implementation of best practices as those outlined in the “Dear Colleagues” letter issued by the U. S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights (4/4/2011)  for data collection, policies, procedures, and efforts towards response, education, and prevention;

-designation of a College official who “owns” the issue of response to sexual assault, coordinates College efforts, and offers periodic reports to the College community; and

-implementation of an expanded, coordinated, and systematized data collection and record-keeping protocol which records all reports of student sexual assault, and expands current recording and reporting practices beyond those based on compliance with Clery Act requirements.

 

o   Motion carried.

#4  Policy Governing Student Conduct

Presently:  College policies and the Student Code of Conduct appear to serve as institutional barriers to students in need of assistance during some emergencies. Seemingly, students refrain from reporting or seeking assistance during some emergencies and crises (e.g., sexual assault and excessive chemical consumption) due to concerns about possible sanctions linked to event-related alcohol and/or chemical use. Further, the Student Code of Conduct warrants revision in order to align it with recent changes in NYS law (Penal Law 220.78) regarding the provision of assistance in medical emergencies.

 

Motion:  The Senate recommends to the President that he initiate review of the Student Code of Conduct, and support changes which align the Code with NYS law (Penal law 220.78) and serve to increase the likelihood that students will contact College officials to report and to seek assistance amidst  emergencies and crises. We urge that proposals for changes to the Student Code of Conduct be presented to the College Council for review and approval prior to the start of fall 2012 or sooner.

 

o   Motion carried.

Faculty Affairs, James McLean                          

The committee recommends adoption of the following resolution:

 

Faculty Affairs Committee Motion

 

Whereas response rates to online SOFIs are inadequate and unrelated to attendance, and

Whereas non-attending students who cannot evaluate class can respond to online SOFIs, and

Whereas online SOFI response rates vary greatly, and

Whereas the online SOFI system has sometimes been unreliable, and

Whereas students fill out SOFIs in a non-uniform time and manner,

Therefore, FAC recommends that neither online SOFI numbers nor written comments be used in the evaluation of faculty.

 

o   Discussion of resolution

§  Issue: Online SOFI response rate is very low

§  Debate ensued for 20 minutes concerning how useful the online format is for gathering student feedback.

§  Suggestion: go back to paper SOFI’s so that professors can set aside class time for their completion.

§  Concerns about validity of results of SOFI’s if not done online

§  M. Mitschow proposed motion to table discussion. Seconded.

§  Motion failed.

§  More debate.

 

Lost quorum & meeting adjourned

Adjournment:  5:50 PM

 

 

Minutes of the Faculty Affairs Committee

April 10, 2012

 

Present:  J. McLean (Chair), S. Derne, B. Evans, L. O’Brian, H. Waddy, C. Filice, J. Allen, V. Farmer, R. Kahrs, D. Matthews, A. Sheldon

 

Call to Order

James McLean called the meeting to order at 4:05 PM.

 

Minutes

Minutes from previous March 6 Meeting, plus revisions, were approved

                                                                                                                       

Chair’s Report: 

- Advisory Group on faculty hiring has been formed

 -  Survey of faculty with high SOFI response rates is available

 New Business

None

 

 Old Business:

- Draft of “Policy on Review of Part-time and Short-term Faculty” proposal was discussed at some length. The decision was made to send some feedback back to the Provost and to the Senate (asking for further information, but advising that FAC be involved in future policy decisions on this matter)

- SOFI motion (recently tabled by the Senate) was re-discussed.  The draft was carefully reformulated with input from most FAC members.  It will be brought up for Senate consideration.

 

Adjournment

J. McLean adjourned the meeting at 5:20 PM.

 

Respectfully submitted,

C. Filice

 

Policy Committee Minutes

10 April 2012

 

Attendance:  Jeff Over, Atsushi Tajima, Jared Meagher, Kurt Fletcher, Kristina Hannam, Chris Leary, Jim Kernan, Brice Weigman, Michael Mooney, Dori Farthing, Maria Lima

 

Guest:  Savi Iyer

 

Chair Jeff Over called the meeting to order at 4:04 pm.  Discussion commenced on a proposal from Savi Iyer to rework College policies on Satisfactory Progress, Academic Probation, and Academic Dismissal.  Dean Iyer emphasized the need for an enforceable, consistent policy.  Topics of discussion included clarifying that the definition of Good Standing include a lower expectation of earned credits only for students in their first semester at Geneseo.  After the usual bout of communal wordsmithing, Kurt Fletcher moved that the Policy Committee accept the proposal as altered and forward it to Senate, with a request that the Senate waive first reading of the policy.  Mike Mooney seconded the motion and the motion carried.  It was agreed that the Chair would send a copy of the policy out on the Senate email distribution list before the next Senate meeting.  A copy of the passed policy is attached below.

 

Seeing no further business, the Chair thanked the members of the Committee for their work and adjourned the meeting at 4:45 pm.

 

 

EXISTING POLICY

(p. 34 in the 2011-2012 Undergraduate Bulletin)

Satisfactory Progress

Satisfactory progress is defined as: (1) the completion of a minimum of 11 semester hours of course work per semester (8 hours for freshmen and first-semester transfer students) with a passing grade, and (2) a minimum cumulative grade point average of 2.00.

 

Academic Probation

Students are reviewed for academic probation at the end of each semester. Students will be placed on probation if they fail to complete a satisfactory number of hours in any given semester and/or their cumulative GPA falls below 2.00. These students will receive probation letters from the Dean of the College.  The letter will also recommend that the student take such actions as seeking advisement or counseling and reviewing work schedules. Students placed on academic probation will be required to receive advisement before registration.  Students on probation must make satisfactory progress in their next semester or they will be subject to dismissal (i.e., two consecutive probationary semesters will subject students to dismissal proceedings). Unless otherwise stipulated by the Academic Standards Committee or otherwise noted in this Bulletin, students on probation are not precluded from participation in college-sponsored co-curricular activities.

 

Academic Dismissal

Students are reviewed for academic dismissal at the end of each semester. Students will be dismissed after two consecutive semesters on probation. Dismissed students are no longer eligible to continue at the College and will be denied further registration.  Notification of dismissal is sent by mail and e-mail to the student’s home address on record with the College at the end of the semester in question. Each student is responsible for informing the College through the Office of Records and Scheduling of updates and changes to his/her address.

 

Minimum Grade Point Requirements

 

Any student with a GPA below 2.00 shall be on Academic Probation.

 

Notes:

 

·       Students placed on probation may be restricted from selected academic opportunities requiring a cumulative GPA above 2.00, such as Internships, Overseas Study, and honors opportunities. Please consult the Office of the Dean of the College for details.

 

·       The College defines a “full-time” load as twelve credit hours registered and paid for. The “satisfactory progress” load of eleven semester hours is not the same as a “full-time” load.

 

·       Students receiving financial aid should consult the Financial Aid Office, Erwin 107, concerning eligibility to receive or retain financial aid.

 

PROPOSED POLICY

 

Satisfactory Progress Good Standing

Satisfactory progress Good standing status for a semester is defined as: (1) the successful completion of a minimum of 11 semester hours credits of course work per semester (8 hours credits for students in their first semester at Geneseo), for freshmen and first-semester transfer students) with a passing grade, and (2) a minimum cumulative grade point average of 2.00.

 

Academic Probation and Dismissal

Full time students are reviewed for academic probation at the end of each fall and spring semester. Students will be placed on probation if they fail to complete a satisfactory number of hours in any given semester the minimum number of credits required for good standing in two successive semesters, and/or their cumulative GPA falls below 2.00. These students will receive probation letters from the Dean of Curriculum and Academic Services.  The letter will also recommend that the student take such actions as seeking academic advisement or counseling and reviewing work schedules. Students placed on academic probation will be required to receive academic advisement before registration.  Students on probation must make satisfactory progress meet the criteria for good standing in their next semester or they will be dismissed. subject to dismissal (i.e., two consecutive probationary semesters will subject students to dismissal proceedings). Unless otherwise stipulated by the Academic Standards Committee Dean of Curriculum and Academic Services, or otherwise noted in this Bulletin, students on probation are not precluded from participation in college-sponsored co-curricular activities.

 

Academic Dismissal

Students are reviewed for academic dismissal at the end of each fall and spring semester. Students will be dismissed after two consecutive semesters on probation. Dismissed students are no longer eligible to continue at the College and will be denied further registration.  Notification of dismissal is sent by mail and e-mail to the student’s home address on record with the College at the end of the semester in question. Each student is responsible for informing the College through the Office of Records and Scheduling of updates and changes to his/her address.

 

Minimum Grade Point Requirements

 

Any student with a GPA below 2.00 shall be on Academic Probation.

 

Notes:

 

·       Students placed on probation may be restricted from selected academic opportunities requiring a minimum cumulative GPA above of 2.00, such as Internships, Overseas Study, and honors opportunities. Please consult the Office of the Dean of Curriculum and Academic Services the College for details.

 

·       The College defines a “full-time” load as twelve 12 credits hours registered and paid for. The minimum number of credits required to meet the good standing status “satisfactory progress” load of eleven semester hours is not the same as a “full-time” load.

 

·       Students receiving financial aid should consult the Financial Aid Office, Erwin 107, concerning eligibility to receive or retain financial aid.

 

PROPOSED POLICY (without the edits)

 

Good Standing

Good standing status for a semester is defined as: (1) the successful completion of a minimum of 11 credits of course work (8 credits for students in their first semester at Geneseo), and (2) a minimum cumulative grade point average of 2.00.

 

Academic Probation and Dismissal

Full time students are reviewed for academic probation at the end of each fall and spring semester. Students will be placed on probation if they fail to complete the minimum number of credits required for good standing in two successive semesters, or their cumulative GPA falls below 2.00. These students will receive probation letters from the Dean of Curriculum and Academic Services.  The letter will also recommend that the student take such actions as seeking academic advisement or counseling and reviewing work schedules. Students placed on academic probation will be required to receive academic advisement before registration.  Students on probation must meet the criteria for good standing in their next semester or they will be dismissed. Unless otherwise stipulated by the Dean of Curriculum and Academic Services, students on probation are not precluded from participation in college-sponsored co-curricular activities.

 

Students are reviewed for academic dismissal at the end of each fall and spring semester. Dismissed students are no longer eligible to continue at the College and will be denied further registration.  Notification of dismissal is sent by mail and e-mail to the student’s home address on record with the College at the end of the semester in question. Each student is responsible for informing the College through the Office of Records and Scheduling of updates and changes to his/her address.

 

Notes:

 

·       Students placed on probation may be restricted from selected academic opportunities requiring a minimum cumulative GPA of 2.00, such as Internships, Overseas Study, and honors opportunities. Please consult the Office of the Dean of Curriculum and Academic Services for details.

 

·       The College defines a “full-time” load as 12 credits registered and paid for. The minimum number of credits required to meet the good standing status is not the same as a “full-time” load.

 

·       Students receiving financial aid should consult the Financial Aid Office, Erwin 107, concerning eligibility to receive or retain financial aid.

 

 

 

College Senate Meeting Minutes

May 1, 2012

Present: J. Allen, K. Becker, S.A. Brainard, A. Carroll, R. Coloccia, C. Dahl, S. Derne, L. Dougherty, B. Evans, V. Farmer, D. Farthing,C. Filice, K. A. Fletcher, C. Filice, K. Fletcher, J. Giorgione, D. Granger, C. Haddad, K. Hannam, B. Harrison, G.  Hartvigsen, A. Heap, S. Iyer, H. Jeong, R. Kahrs, J. Katz, J. Kernan, M. Klotz, C. Kreutter, C. Leary, M. Lima, C. Long, J. Lovett, D. Mackenzie, T. Macula, G. Marcus, D. Matthews, J. McGarrah, P. McLaughlin, J. McLean, D. McPherson, J. Meagher, J. Miller, J. Milroy, M. Mitschow, M. Mooney, L. O’Brien, T. Ocon, J. Okada, J. Over, P. Pacheco, D. Repinski, S. Salmon, R. Scott, A. Sheldon, D. Showers (Chair), A. Steinhauer, M. Sullivan, A. Tajima, D. Tamarin, R. Vasiliev, R., H. Waddy, B.Weigman, J. Williams, A. Yauney

 

Call to Order

D. Showers (Chair) called the meeting to order at 4:05 PM                                                                            

 

Adoption of the Agenda

The agenda as previously published was accepted without objection.

 

Adoption of the Minutes

The minutes of April 3, 2012 as previously published were accepted without objection.

 

Faculty Affairs Committee:  James McLean

·       Motion to replace motion discussed at the last meeting on use of SOFI information for faculty evaluations:

 

Substitute motion on the use of SOFI Information

 

•        Whereas it is the current policy that student input is a required part of faculty evaluation,

•        Whereas, the Senate recognizes the important role of accurate student feedback reflecting the students' opinions of the quality of the instruction they receive,

•        Whereas response rates to online SOFIs are inadequate and unrelated to attendance,

•        Whereas non-attending students who cannot evaluate class can respond to online SOFIs,

•        Whereas online SOFI response rates vary greatly,

•        Whereas the online SOFI system has sometimes been unreliable,

•        Whereas students fill out SOFIs in a non-uniform time and manner,

•        Therefore, Senate concludes that the current system fails to capture student opinion accurately, and 

•        Therefore, Senate recommends that the College replace online administration of the SOFIs used in the evaluation of faculty with a valid alternative

o   Addresses “online” system which is causing low response rates

o   Motion to substitute the proposed motion for the one previously discussed carried

·       Replacement motion discussed

o   Motion carried

 

President’s Report, Christopher Dahl

·       How campuses allocate their funds proposed 5% money devoted to performance based funding-he doesn’t think it works

·       Middle states final team report preparing report

·       May 2 Wads lecture-about Shakespeare

·       Two commencement speakers: one for AM, one for PM

Provost’s Report, Carol Long

·       Center for Inquiry-7 ambassadorships

·       Dept. chairs call for innovation due May 30^th

·       SUNY funding-differences in staff funding

Chair, Dennis Showers

·       University Faculty Senate meeting at Geneseo went well

·       Middle states report next steps

·       Ad hoc committee for SOFI issues

Vice Chair, Jim Williams

·       No report

Past-Chair, David Granger

·       Language for Constitution re: for budget priorities committee

As a Committee of the College, the amendment does not have to be approved by the Faculty. It is being read into the record and the changes will be made to the Constitution.

 

Article X

Section 5: Budget Priorities Committee

 

The Budget Priorities Committee (BPC) advises the President on budget priorities and works with the Strategic Planning Group to link resources with college planning goals.

 

a.      Membership: The Budget Priorities Committee shall be co-chaired by the Past Chair of the College Senate and Vice President for Administration and Finance. Its membership shall also be comprised of the following:

o   Current Chair, College Senate

o   Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs

o   Vice President for Student and Campus Life

o   Vice President for Advancement

o   President of the Student Government Association or his/her designee

o   A member of the professional staff – appointed

o   Two members of the faculty – appointed

 

The Director of Budget will serve as resource staff to the Budget Priorities Committee.

 

b.     Process for appointment: The President shall appoint a member of the professional staff to serve a two-year term. The President, in consultation with the Executive Committee of the College Senate, shall appoint two members of the faculty for two-year terms.

 

c.      Functions: The Budget Priorities Committee will play a key role in certain matters as they pertain to the College’s Budget, and may on occasion be asked to serve in a consultative role with the President.

a.      The BPC will review responses to Budget Call Letters and prepare a prioritized listing of requests for the President’s review. This listing shall be prepared in a manner that is consistent with and in support of the College’s strategic planning goals and budget priorities as established by the Strategic Planning Group (SPG).

b.      On an annual basis, the BPC will conduct general reviews of the College’s budget and report on the same to the College Senate.

c.      From time to time, the BPC may be called upon by the President and/or SPG to undertake special studies and analyses consistent with its role as an advisory committee on budget related matters. Such studies or analyses should be done in the context of the College’s overall goals and priorities, and may have tight timelines for completion.

d.     The President may also choose to convene the BPC to consult with him on specific budgetary matters requiring a more immediate response.

 

Secretary, Cheryl Kreutter

 -  All bulletins available on College Senate website

Treasurer, Aaron Steinhauer

-   Senate fund-balance $479.42

University Faculty Senator, Gregg Hartvigsen

-   No report

Vice President, Student Assoc., Tyler Ocon

-   No report                                  

Undergraduate Curricula, Ren Vasiliev

·       UCC Proposes for Second Reading:

All proposals are available at: \\files\outbox\DeanOfCollege\doc\ucc

            Course Deletions

o   PLSC 220: Failed States

o   Motion carried

New Courses

o   ARTH 160: African American Art History Survey

o   ENVR 250: Urban Environmental Issues in Latin America

o   ENVR 268: Landscapes and Livelihoods in Central

o   Appalachia

o   FREN 375: French-Canadian Literature

o   GEOG 269: Geographic Field Studies in Western Canada

o   GERM 318: Advanced Grammar and Composition

o   PLSC 351: Failed States

o   XLRN 201: Real World Geneseo

o   BIOL 216: Biology Second Year Laboratory

·       Motion carried

              Program Revisions

o   International Relations B.A.

·       Motion carried

Undergraduate Policies, Jeff Over

o   Second Reading of proposal re: “good standing, academic probation and dismissal” (p. 34 Undergraduate Bulletin) circulated prior to meeting (see CSB 7a)

o   Duane McPherson: Point of Order: circulating proposal via College Senate Bulletin does not qualify for standing rules; therefore, motion not appropriate

o   The Chair ruled that the publication of the proposal in the College Senate Bulletin met the requirement for first reading and the proposals could be considered for Second Reading.

o   McPherson made a motion appealing the ruling of the Chair. Seconded.

o   Showers: “Shall the decision of the Chair stand?”

o   Motion carried.

o   Discussion of Undergraduate Policies Proposal

o   Motion carried

Graduate Academic Affairs, Susan Salmon

Second Reading:

All proposals are available at: \\files\outbox\DeanOfCollege\doc\gcc\Academic Year 2011-2012

New Courses

o   CURR 5xx: Multiliteracies: Integration of Multiliteracies in Inclusive Adolescence Education

o   EDUC 4XX/5XX:  Literacy and Language Development in English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL)

o   INTD 5XX: Teaching Mathematics in the Inclusive Classroom– Grades 7-12

o   SPED 406: Applied Behavior Analysis

o   SPED 420: Instructional Strategies and Inquiry in Inclusive Adolescent Education 

o   SPED 5XX: Capstone Seminar- Inclusive Adolescent Education

o   SPED 5XX: Student Teaching Internship- Inclusive Adolescent Education

·       Motion carried.

New Programs

o   Master of Science in Adolescence Mathematics Education with Special Education Certification.

·       Motion carried.

o   Minimum Competence Requirement

Master’s candidates in any teacher education program must satisfy the 3.0 cumulative grade point average requirement to continue in their Master’s program and to graduate.  A grade of C or better is required for each of the courses in their program, and any course in which the candidate has earned less than a C cannot be used to meet program requirements.

·       Motion carried.

Student Affairs Committee, Dan Repinski

            - No report

Faculty Affairs Committee, James McLean

-  Anyone interested in working with Provost on drafting specific improvements of SOFI, please contact James McLean

 

Old Business: none

New Business:  The Chair thanked the Officers of the Faculty, the Chairs of the Standing Committees and all Senators for their service this year

Adjournment:  5:03 PM

 

Respectfully submitted,

Cheryl A. Kreutter, College Senate Secretary

 

 

Final Report from the Chair of the Faculty Affairs Committee

2011-2012

 

Accomplishments of the year

 

1.     Review of KnightWeb administration for Student Opinion of Faculty Instruction forms

At the beginning of both semesters, FAC met with Julie Rao and others to review successes, difficulties, and suggestions for the new implementation of the SOFIs on KnightWeb.

 

2.     Comments to Provost on Teagle Grant

In early November, Provost Long asked for FAC’s impressions concerning a COPLAC planning grant funded by the Teagle Foundation, aimed at establishing a network among COPLAC schools to enable distance mentoring of research.  FAC responded, in short, that although it seemed like an interesting concept, that it might be difficult to find Geneseo faculty who would serve as distance mentors, especially considering that in-person research mentoring would nearly always be superior, and that Geneseo does not lack for local students interested in research participation.

 

3.    Finalizing Review of new Form H

A completely revised version of the Form H used for faculty personnel review was given a stamp of approval by the College Senate in spring 2009.  During the 2010-2011 year, FAC gave the Provost feedback concerning several specific issues pertaining to the form, including reactions for the then-current members of the Faculty Personnel Committee.  This year (in March 2012), FAC made a recommendation to the Provost concerning the main question to arise from the FAC-FPC meeting.  As far as we know, this resolves all open questions concerning the new Form H.

 

The question addressed was whether itemized rankings on the form should be binary (e.g., meets expectations/does not meet expectations), or should have multiple levels.  The current FAC recommendation (a repeat of the recommendation from several earlier groups) was to keep them binary, but that if the Provost felt it necessary, to add “recommended with reservations” to the Summary Decision.

 

4.  Discussion of availability and format of SOFI reports

FAC felt that the increased availability of SOFI reports, due to access through KnightWeb, increases the likelihood of less thoughtful use of that information.  We discussed modifications to the SOFI summary reports in response to this.  The one recommendation to come out of these discussions was to have standard deviation information shown graphically as well as numerically.  There were other suggestions up for discussion, however further work was overshadowed by the crisis in low SOFI response rates.

 

5.   Recommendations to Provost on obtaining faculty input for allocation of new faculty lines

The Provost asked FAC for suggestions on how she might best get input from faculty members concerning the allocation of faculty lines, specifically considering that in the next few years, lines which have been held vacant will be able to be re-activated, and not necessarily allocated to the same departments that previously used them.  FAC responded that (1) FAC itself was well suited to the task and (2) if FAC should not be used, then working within the structure of the Senate was strongly encouraged.  FAC also, in a separate memo, made recommendations to the Provost concerning what sort of information would be needed to give informed advice, including strongly recommending that department chairs be given information about the general outline of the decision before they submitted specific proposals.

 

6.   Senate motion on consequences of very low SOFI response rate

The campus-wide average SOFI response rate for fall 2011 was 32%.  Primarily in response to this, FAC moved in Senate a resolution that these SOFI results should not be used in the evaluation of faculty.  After some revision, to make it clear that student input was a necessary and important part of evaluation of faculty and that a valid alternative to the current situation was necessary, the resolution passed the Senate on May 1.

 

7.   Recommendations to Provost concerning formal personnel review of part-time and short-term faculty.

In its final meeting, FAC reviewed a proposed policy and special Form H for the evaluation of part-time and short-term faculty.  Comments were returned to the Provost.  Although several inconsistencies with the full-time evaluation process were identified, the prime comment was that the policy failed to identify precisely what benefits would be derived from these evaluations or how those would be implemented.  It was therefore difficult to evaluate whether the significant additional workload was merited

 

Recommended business for FAC of 2012-2013

 

1)     Maintenance of Effort

There are several prior actions of FAC for which no immediate action is required, but which FAC should monitor for progress.  These include

a)      Universal Senate Calendar:  Although this was approved in spring 2011, little has been done to implement the concept.  As a first step, the generic schedule could be posted on the Senate web site.

b)     New Form H:  This has been in ongoing discussion since 2007, and although opinions still differ (and always will) on some elements, the issue has reached maturity.  As far as I know, there are no barriers to implementation other than the effort required for the implementation itself.  This is clearly the purview of the Provost, but friendly and helpful pressure from FAC can be a positive force.

c)      SOFIs: FAC actions of the past which have not yet been brought to full force include:

i)      A Senate-approved motion to have the SOFI period end at least 2 weeks before the end of the semester.  This has not been implemented.

ii)     A letter from FAC, revised in 2010, that is intended to be distributed to all faculty at the beginning of each SOFI period.  Delivery has been inconsistent.

iii)   A system, created at FAC request, where faculty have some control over when SOFIs for a particular class become available to students.  While this system was implemented for fall 2011, in spring 2012 it was made more difficult to find.  Advertising of this to faculty has been minimal.  Adding a description to the letter in (ii) might be advisable.

 

2)     SOFI Improvements

For decades, FAC has played a large roll in the policy and content of the SOFIs, although not necessarily in the specifics of delivery and implementation.  Clearly, major changes to the SOFI system are needed.  As of this writing, there is a move to convene an ad hoc group of faculty to guide these changes, but FAC should continue to play a major role.  Issues which have been discussed in the recent past, but which have not been brought to action, include:  changes to the SOFI Summary Reports (see Accomplishment 4 above), advocating for in-class administration of SOFIs (see the “Suggestions letter” in 1.c.ii above).  There is also a vacuum to be filled in the area of SOFI policy, which should clearly record rules for timing of the whole process, for how faculty may encourage completion, for which classes are exempt, for how remaining classes are averaged, for how team-taught classes are handled, and likely for other aspects.

 

3)     Evaluation of Part-Time and Short-Term Faculty

Accomplishment 7 above was the result of active pursuit by FAC.  Prior to that, the policy had developed with no input from shared governance.  Assuming that the policy will continue to be refined and brought to implementation, FAC should remain involved.  While it appears necessary for such a policy to pass through Senate before implementation, it will be most effective and efficient to include FAC input earlier rather than later.

 

4)     Family Leave

At the beginning of 2011-2012, improvement of family leave policy was identified as a high-priority subject.  Unfortunately, it was never addressed.

 

Respectfully submitted,

James McLean

 

 

College Senate Student Affairs Committee

2011-2012

Final Report

 

Our work this year was a review of (1) College efforts to ensure the safety and well-being of students, and (2) our campus response to sexual assault. Given this agenda, we met with three College officials to discuss a wide range of issues.  Our guests were Leonard Sancilio, Dean of Students; Sal Simonetti, Chief, Geneseo UPD; and Melinda DuBois, Administrative Director of Lauderdale Health and Counseling, and Co-Chair of the Advisory Committee on Campus Security.  In addition, our consideration was guided by recent revisions to New York State laws, and new guidance from the U.S.  Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights concerning best practices for higher education institutions in relation to sexual assault response.

 

As a result of our review, four recommendations were approved by the College Senate on April 3, 2012 and sent to the President:

 

Program Funding

The Senate recommends to the President that he support funding for efforts which seek to (1) prevent sexual assault at Geneseo, and (2) educate faculty, staff, and students about resources and options available to those who have experienced sexual assault. The Senate SAC will seek to update with the President regarding status of this issue in fall 2012.

Transportation Funding

The Senate recommends to the President that he support the development and funding of a service whereby medically-stable students who seek a forensic evaluation by a Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner following the experience of sexual assault are assisted by the College with necessary transportation. We urge that this be implemented prior to the start of fall 2012 or sooner.

Administrative Structure and Procedures

The Senate recommends to the President that the organization and procedures of the College sexual assault response effort be reviewed. We urge that the following be considered and implemented prior to the start of fall 2012 or sooner:

-implementation of best practices as those outlined in the “Dear Colleagues” letter issued by the U. S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights (4/4/2011)  for data collection, policies, procedures, and efforts towards response, education, and prevention;

-designation of a College official who “owns” the issue of response to sexual assault, coordinates College efforts, and offers periodic reports to the College community; and

-implementation of an expanded, coordinated, and systematized data collection and record-keeping protocol which records all reports of student sexual assault, and expands current recording and reporting practices beyond those based on compliance with Clery Act requirements.

Policy Governing Student Conduct

The Senate recommends to the President that he initiate review of the Student Code of Conduct, and support changes which align the Code with NYS law (Penal law 220.78) and serve to increase the likelihood that students will contact College officials to report and to seek assistance amidst emergencies and crises. We urge that proposals for changes to the Student Code of Conduct be presented to the College Council for review and approval prior to the start of fall 2012 or sooner.

We offer the following as suggestions for the 2012-2013 College Senate Student Affairs Committee agenda:

 

-Review the status of the implementation of the four recommendations sent to the President in April 2012;

-Review the adequacy of campus recreational and athletic spaces;

-Review Orientation and First-Year programs; and

-Review the new Hazing Policy, the pledge activities of Greek-letter organizations, and the initiation activities of other student groups.

 

Respectfully submitted by Dan Repinski, SAC Chair

 

 

Report to the College Senate of the recommendations of the Faculty Personnel Committee for 2011-2012

 

Membership of the Faculty Personnel Committee for 2011-2012:

Anne Eisenberg

Kim Davies Hoffman

Olympia Nicodemi

Robert O’Donnell

Jeff Over

Paul Pacheco

Daniel Strang

 

Recommendations made for 2011-2012:

 

Continuing Appointment:  The Faculty Personnel Committee made seven recommendations for continuing appointment.  The Committee recommended positively for five cases and recommended negatively for  two cases.

 

Promotion to Associate Librarian or Associate Professor:  The Faculty Personnel Committee made six recommendations for promotion to associate librarian or associate professor.  The Committee recommended positively for five cases and recommended negatively for one case.

 

Promotion to Full Professor:  The Faculty Personnel Committee made five recommendations for promotion to full professor.  The Committee recommended positively for four cases and recommended negatively for one case.

 

 

Respectfully submitted on behalf of the Faculty Personnel Committee,

 

Daniel R. Strang

Chair, Faculty Personnel Committee 2011-2012