January 13, 2005 – 3:00 pm – Inlow Hall 115 Conference Room
Present: Doug Briney, Marcella Crawford, Leandro Espinosa, Dawna Flanagan, Jackie Grant, Tom Herrmann, Mary Koza, Katie Ladouceur, Brian Sather
Brian Sather called the meeting to order. Introductions were made. We discussed meeting dates for Winter term. The dates are Feb. 3, Feb. 24, and Mar 10. The time will be from 3:00 – 4:00 pm, as this seems to work for the most people.
We discussed the purpose and organization of the ASC. We suggested making the following changes to the organization of the committee.
We suggested making the following changes to the duties and responsibilities of the committee.
Following these minutes is a version, which incorporates all our suggested changes. Please contact Brian if you have any further input.
We talked about the policy changes we made last year to the Y, X, and I grades, as well as the new add/drop policy. Dawna reported the impact to the Registrar’s office.
Mary indicated that the policies have been good for DDE. Katie said that she had some problems adding and dropping with both a Dean’s office and the Registrar’s office. Concerns were aired about the inconvenience for students who must track down faculty to get a signature to drop a class. Faculty seem happy with the add policy because they have a better idea who is in their class. We discussed the possibility of changing the deadlines for using the add/drop forms so that the impact would be less. We will revisit these policies at a future meeting.
Appeals Process
We need to discuss the suspension appeals process in detail. It is difficult to get faculty and students together on the first days of class, when everyone is their busiest. We should see if there is a more efficient way to conduct the hearings, by perhaps meeting once to discuss all the appeals. We should also try to monitor the progress of the students who successfully appeal the committee.
Policy Handbook
Brian would like to see a policy handbook for the committee, so that as membership changes over the years, new members will have a history. There are a number of files that we can go through to find some of the history of the committee. We should also get the web page for ASC to coincide with the committee’s purpose.
Student Requests
A letter from a student requesting an academic bankruptcy was reviewed. The committee approved the request unanimously.
Suspension petitions from three students were reviewed and recommendations made.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:10 pm.
Proposed additions are underlined.
From http://www.eou.edu/assembly/constitution/SECTIONS/BYLAWS.HTM
Printed 1/10/05
Proposed revisions 1/13/05
Section 4. Academic Standards Committee
February 3, 2005 - 3:00 pm - Inlow Hall 115 Conference Room
Present: Doug Briney, Marcella Crawford, Leandro Espinosa, Dawna Flanagan, Tom Herrmann, Rick Kovacic, Brian Sather
Student Requests
The committee looked at a request from a student to change the grading mode from graded to audit. The request was approved. [As a note of caution: The staff in the Registrar’s office asks the committee to be aware that these requests are a form of grade manipulation by the student and should not be approved liberally. It will be difficult for the committee to justify denying the next student who requests a change in the grade mode.] The committee then looked at a suspension petition. Rick Kovacic is the student’s advisor and will change his F grade to an incomplete, as he is continuing to turn in materials for the course in question. When this is done, his term GPA will be above 2.0 and he will be considered on continued probation. He also needs to add the courses he is currently enrolled in.
The changes to the ASC bylaws will need to go through the proper channels before they become permanent. Brian is checking to make sure we follow proper procedure.
Brian has control of the website at this time. As his term on the ASC ends this year, we will be phasing control to Dawna.
We discussed at length the difficulties with the appeals process at the beginning of each term. It was decided that we would meet on the Tuesday before classes for Spring term, and if the term begins on a Monday, we will meet in the late afternoon on Monday until finished. We tabled further discussion for now, but Dawna will change the letters that go out to students for Spring term to reflect the new deadline to get petition letters to her.
EPCC would like to meet with our committee during one of their upcoming meetings to discuss our research on comparator universities. As it turns out, we are very comparable to institutions similar to us. Brian will email what we came up with last year to the committee members.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 pm.
February 24, 2005 - 3:00 pm - Inlow Hall 115 Conference Room
Present: Doug Briney, Leandro Espinosa, Dawna Flanagan, Rick Kovacic, Mary Koza, Brian Sather
Repeated Courses
An issue came up with repeated courses. Advisors need to be aware of courses that are repeated, and need to especially pay attention to transfer courses.
Student Appeal
The committee looked at a request from a suspended student who wishes to take courses again Spring term. The appeal was granted, and the student is asked to meet with her advisor and to take 10 credits or less. She is also asked to repeat courses she has failed in order to raise her GPA.
Grade Manipulation
Dawna spoke to the committee regarding grade manipulation as it relates to students who request change of grade mode (S/U and audit) after the deadline. The committee needs to keep in mind that this may be the reason a student is requesting the change of grade mode.
BA vs BS Ad Hoc Committee
Brian asked Leandro and Jackie to be on the joint EPCC/ASC ad hoc committee to research and discuss the BA vs BS. Mary mentioned that gen ed QR will require students to take more math automatically. The ad hoc committee will do the following:
- come up with a definition for each degree to be listed in the catalog
- define the differences between EOU and other colleges
- define the problem
- look at equity in the BA and BS
- how one is more appropriate to a discipline than the other
- how any changes may impact students and student retention
- come up with a recommendation to be presented to EPCC and ASC in another joint meeting
At the time the new add/drop policy was implemented, the intent was to require the dean’s signature after 20% of the course had passed. However, it is not feasible for the Registrar’s office to check on how much of the course has passed, so this part of the policy will be difficult to regulate. It is easier to request the dean’s signature for all adds after the 2nd week of class.
The remainder of the agenda will be discussed at the next meeting on March 10. This includes the following:
Student appeals process
Policy handbook for ASC
Meeting times for Spring term
March 10, 2005 - 3:00 pm - Inlow Hall 115 Conference Room
Brian reported that Marcella Crawford would no longer be on the committee, and that Student Government would be assigning a replacement.
The best times for meetings this Spring will be 3:00 – 4:00 pm on Thursdays. We will check with the two Colleges to see which days they have School meetings. At our next meeting we will be discussing the Academic Honest Code, reviewing the policy in the Handbook, and talking about the academic interventions. Brian would like us to all review the website and give him feedback.
After much discussion to the advantages and disadvantages to having the suspension hearings on the first day of class, we decided to review student appeals on the Tuesday before classes for this spring term. Before our Thursday meeting, we will review the students who were late in getting their appeals to us. It was suggested that we as a committee be flexible each term and try to set the appeals based on when the term begins. This will be dependent on what day of the week each term begins. We will need to make any changes to our policy in the catalog and in the student handbook. At this time, both are very specific in their deadlines for appeals. Dawna will find out how changes in policy affect the catalog.
Brian will present our bylaw changes at the next Assembly meeting, which is April 5.
The ad hoc committee will have Leandro, Jackie, Mary, and Dawna from the ASC. Other members will be selected from EPCC. The committee will present their findings to both the ASC and EPCC in May.
March 31, 2005 - 3:00 pm - Badgley Hall 208 Conference Room
Present: Leandro Espinosa, Dawna Flanagan, Tom Herrmann, Rick Kovacic, Brian Sather and Colleen Cascio (guest)
The committee reviewed suspension appeals from four students and one academic bankruptcy request. All were approved, however, it turns out the bankruptcy request cannot be granted as the student does not qualify.
The Student Affairs Committee would like the ASC to bring forward the Academic Honesty Code to the Assembly. They feel it would be more appropriate coming from our committee. However, the Colleges must approve the policy first.
Students are given the Honesty Code during orientation. We would like a website created for students to investigate the definitions for plagiarism, especially as it pertains to the different disciplines. For example, Music has different definitions than History. We must also figure out where to place the Student Pledge.
Currently Colleen contacts students who are suspected of violating the Academic Honesty Code to visit with the Student Affairs office, and Irene Jerome evaluates the student to see if they truly understand what plagiarism is. Student Affairs would like to see more reporting of violations of the Academic Honesty Code, and any issues pertaining to it.
In our discussions, we decided to make the following changes:
We must be sure to cite our own sources for this code.
Omit the students’ rights paragraph, as they will get due process anyway.
Eliminate the student signature on the form, as it will be difficult to enforce.
Add “no other action recommended” on the form.
Brian will make the changes and circulate it through ASC. Then he will take it to the two Colleges.
April 28, 2005 - 3:00 pm - Inlow Hall 115 Conference Room
Present: Leandro Espinosa, Dawna Flanagan, Tom Herrmann, Mary Koza, Brian Sather and Colleen Cascio (guest)
Brian will take the Academic Honesty Code to the next Arts & Sciences College meeting next week, where they will hopefully approve it at the College level. There has been additional discussion regarding how instructors can investigate possible violations and what the next steps are for instructors. The committee decided to strike the sentence “Students, when they register, acknowledge…” There are still questions regarding implementation of the honor pledge. The Provost has been asked for guidance on this matter.
The committee needs to decide the gpa level for prospective President’s Scholar applicants. We chose 3.70 as the cut-off. Dawna showed the committee last year’s President’s Scholar letter to prospective students as well as the email which is sent to the EOU Infoline listserve. Minor changes were made in the dates.
Dawna brought up the Graduation with Distinction policy and the confusion that arises from the current policy. She hopes the committee will be able to review the policy at a future date.
Provost Miller asked the committee to look at the evaluation of teaching process. The committee expressed concerns about the subjectivity and validity of the current process. The committee felt the process should be reassessed, but this would be beyond the scope of the Academic Standards
Committee. The committee will consider a recommendation statement to be brought to Assembly.
May 12, 2005 - 3:00 pm - Inlow Hall 115 Conference Room
Present: Leandro Espinosa, Dawna Flanagan, Tom Herrmann, Mary Koza, Brian Sather and Anna Maria Dill (guest)
Anna Maria updated us on Academic Interventions since her office received the responsibility about one year ago. There are no staff members available to research and look at data. Bennie Moses’ workload increases dramatically as students contact her for information. Her office sent out 353 letters, with 170 responding, by either talking to their advisors or attending an intervention. It would be beneficial to know if the interventions are having an impact, but will need more manpower to compile and go over data. Facilitators include Student Affairs staff, peer leaders (students) and professional advisors. The facilitators inform students about what it means to be on academic probation, they work in small groups, and they feel the interventions are worthwhile. Anna Maria feels there are two areas that should be looked at: 1) data for freshmen and 2) freshmen success in the program.
Brian updated us on the Academic Honesty Code. It has been to both Colleges and will go before the Assembly during the next meeting.
Please read the President’s Scholar files before the next meeting and we’ll discuss our choices via email to save time.
Brian will request a 5-minute access during the next Assembly meeting to ask for input on how the new Add/Drop policy is going.
Brian asked the remaining committee members to consider electing a chair for next year. The Executive Committee will appoint members during their next meeting. We will also need a new Presidential appointee from Student Affairs staff, since Jackie Grant resigned.
May 26, 2005 -- 3:00 pm
Inlow Hall 115 Conference Room
The committee members tallied their votes for the President’s Scholar. The three names to be forwarded to Dr. Fatemi are Keiko Odashiro, Deirdre Kambasha, and Cierra Olivia Thomas-Williams.
Brian asked committee members to choose a new chair for next year’s committee. Mary Koza agreed to be the chair, as long as there was no policy that the chair must be a teaching faculty member. After the Executive Committee meets, we should know who the new members of the committee will be next year.
The committee was asked to consider a formalized policy for excused absences. These include discipline field trips (Art, Music, Theatre, etc.) and athletic events. After discussion, it was decided that flexibility in attendance for the instructor is the best method at this time.
Since classes begin on Monday Fall term, the committee decided to have suspension hearings on Friday morning, September 23. Dawna will make the arrangements.
Brian will take the following statement to the Provost and the Assembly regarding the evaluation process.
The Academic Standards Committee recently discussed the evaluation of teaching methods at Eastern Oregon University. We strongly feel the current process is flawed and needs to be revamped. However, this task is beyond the scope of this committee so we suggest the appointment of an appropriate authority to oversee a re-examination of the teaching evaluation process. We recommend focusing on the following areas:
- Evaluation instruments: student survey of teaching
- Peer and dean observation of teaching
- Protocols for evaluations and handling of instruments
- More objective criteria for and processes of evaluation
- Utilizing components of effective assessment models at other universities
- Frequency of evaluation
- Consistency and integration related to distance education teaching evaluation
We should try to get the handbook for the ASC on the website. In addition, we should polish the website and create links to the catalog, Student Affairs, Faculty/Staff and student handbooks, etc. We should consider including meeting minutes and letter templates. Dawna will work on this next year when she inherits the ASC website.
Next year, the committee will look at the Graduation with Distinction policy, revising the catalog language as it pertains to suspension hearings and the deadline for appeals, BA vs. BS, and any catalog updates that may pertain to ASC.