Attendance: Catherine Axinn, Josephine Bloomfield, Duncan Brown, Carolyn Cardenas, Scott Carson, Lee Cibrowski, Jesse Davis, John Day, Jason Hartz, David Juedes, Dina Lopez, Christine Mattley, Michael Mumper, Josep Rota, Susan Sarnoff, Katherine Tadlock, Ginger Weade, Maureen Weissenrieder, Joanne Bray for Judith Edinger, and Eileen Theodore-Shusta for Julia Zimmerman. 

Excused: David Drabold, Peter Johnson, Chuck McWeeny, Tootie Overby, and Robert Roe.

Convened: The meeting was convened at 3:10 pm.  Packets with agenda were distributed. 

1.      Approval of Minutes:

Jesse Davis's motion to approve minutes for the May 13th 2005 meeting was seconded by Catheine Axinn.

2.      Chair's Report (Dr. Duncan Brown):

1. Expression of thanks: Duncan thanked all members of Graduate Council for their help in making his first year as chair very successful.  He said that the chairs of all the committees specially made the work easier.  He also mentioned that Michael Mumper and Katie Tadlock have been a pleasure to work with. 

2. Summary of committee responsibilities: Duncan provided a summary of tasks completed and on-going for all the five committees.

a)      Admissions Requirements Committee (Chair: Josie Bloomfield): They had an exceptionally busy year with 40 cases (including the ones being presented today).  The Provost is considering signing the new resolution regarding conflict of interest policy.

b)      Curriculum Committee (Chair: Scott Carson): Many new programs to be offered overseas were evaluated by them.  Duncan said that their job would become easier if the University International Council and the University Curriculum Council could all work together. 

c)      Graduate Affairs and Fellowship Committee (Chair: Peter Johnson): The committee worked with Katie Tadlock to develop literature for Graduate awards and fellowships.  The thesis that was entered in the Midwestern Association of Graduate Schools did not win but received honorable mention.

d)      Planning and Strategy Committee (Chair: Tootie Overby): The committee has been working to evaluate our capacity to increase enrollment in graduate programs.  They are also involved with the strategic planning process of the university.

e)      Policy  Regulations Commitee (Chair: David Drabold): The committee has been responsible for a lot of behind the scenes work.  The committee has been involves in working on updating the graduate catalog, formalising policies for leave of absence and contiuous registration for graduate students. 

3. Visits by the President and Provost: Duncan said that he would like to regularize the visits by President McDavis (in January) and Provost Krendl (in April) at Graduate Council.

4. ElectronicThesis and Dissertations: Duncan reiterated the schedule for visits by the ETD co-ordinator for November and May in each academic year.

5. International Enrollment: Duncan brought to everyone's attention the recent article in the Chronicle of Higher Education about the efforts being taken by United States towards international enrollment.  He said that it would be good to see a long term commitment towards international recruitment in terms of base funding instead of the one time money received for this academic year.

6. September meeting of Graduate Council: Duncan proposed to have the first meeting of the academic year in September versus October.  He said it makes it difficult to get much accomplished given that we do not meet in December. He added that the conflict of interest applications/petitions submitted since June have to wait a very long time for a decision.  Duncan said that the second Friday in September is the 9th, which is also the end of the first week of fall quarter.  If the meeting is held on the third Friday then we run into the same issue as we do for the June meeting as in having only three weeks between the two meetings.  Duncan said that he would work with members via email to do committee assignments.  This would enable the ARC to work on the conflict of interest reviews. Josie said that our issues are on-going so a meeting on the second Friday is possible.  Catherine proposed that the members whose terms were ending this year could also come to the September meeting.  Duncan agreed saying that Faculty Senate also overlaps their old and new Senators which helps in spreading the work load. 

3.      Associate Provost for Graduate Studies, Michael Mumper:

1. Assistant Provost for Multi cultural affairs: Michael informed Graduate Council that Dan Williams is retiring after 18 years of running the office of minority recruitment.  Dr. Eddith Dashiell who is currently an Associate Dean in the College of Communication will be replacing Dan.  Her title will be Assistant Provost for Multi Cultural Affairs, and her first day of work is July1st, 2005.  Michael said that Dan’s efforts will be recognized at the visitation in early November.  The visitation will provide Eddith the first hand opportunity to assess it’s effectiveness.  Some points under consideration regarding the visitation will be whether it should be continued, or there should be multiple smaller ones, or some of that money should be used for traveling (for the same purpose).  Eddith will also be the coordinator of STARS, like Dan used to be. 

2. Terrie Bruscino’s resignation: Michael announced that Terrie’s resignation is imminent in the light of her husband’s upcoming graduation (next Friday) and job offers.  He said that Elizabeth Koonce, who teaches English has been hired to fill Terrie’s position on a part time basis.  Terrie is training her and will also be working half time from home.  Michael added that the once half time position has evolved into a full time position and more, as a large number of students are opting to file their theses and dissertations electronically.  Some staff can be trained in departments where most students file electronically.  Josie asked if more than one person in each department could be trained and Michael said that it was possible to do so.  Catherine raised the question about formats of documents that have to be approved.  Michael said that each dissertation and/or theses must meet the departmental format requirements and the ETD requirements.  Word documents are converted to PDF.  He noted that the ETD director makes sure that the documents correspond to the guidelines and then they are uploaded.  He or she does not have the academic authority to approve the theses or dissertation.  Michael also informed Graduate Council that the Honors Tutorial College will also upload theses of their students on the ETD system. 

3. GSS Election: Mark M is the new president of Graduate Student Senate.  There is no vice president, since there were no candidates for that position.  Each college is required to have a Senator and departments should look for representatives as well. 

4. Strategic Planning—Working document:  Michael said that the Provost is not in favor of calling the document a draft any more, it is being referred to as a working document.  It is a little different from the earlier document.  This document is broader than the original, it expresses the intent to support all graduate programs.  It is also specific in terms of identifying areas of building national prominence.  The document has been broadened based on the feedback received.  It identifies areas of special focus and delineates priorities.  Michael mentioned that there is still opportunity to provide feedback and that all comments should be sent to Gary Schumacher.  One area under discussion is the composition of the Graduate Education and Research Board. 

5. International Recruitment: Michael said that he provided a report to the Provost about the efforts undertaken in this academic year.  He is also putting together a plan for next year and to request base funding, since it was only a one time money that was given earlier this year. 

6. F. Tuition Scholarships and Fee Waivers: Michael said that he is happy to report that the reduction in tuition scholarships and fee waivers by $800,000 has not had an impact on the number of fee paying students. 

7. Thanks: Michael thanked Duncan and all members of Graduate Council for a successful year. 

Duncan mentioned to Graduate Council that on Thursday June 9^th, between 2 and 4 pm there will be an open meeting with the Provost to review all documents (mission and vision statements, executive summary and all).  Scott asked about the latitude possible in the revisions that can be made to the document.  He added that they are putting together a departmental response, and wanted to know if it would have any impact.  Michael said that the document is constantly being revised, he encouraged departments to provide feeback.  He also added that the interpretation and implementation group will be involved in making many critical decisions at the time of implementation.  Josie said that in an interview on the radio the President said that the document will be presented next week.  Duncan said that he believed that the document would be presented to the trustees in late July.  Michael said that it would be, but was not sure how final the document will be then. 

Jesse said that there was lots of discussion this year about the general fees and wanted to know if some decisions had been made.  Michael said that it is possible to make a case to forgo the general fee, but the loss in revenue will be enormous.  He said that it is a million dollars in buyout and that would be the biggest buyout so far.  Jesse added that some schools do not have a general fee at all and some of them that do; charge minimal amounts.  Michael responded that it makes sense to use the buyout money to put it in a pool to offset the fees. 

Katie Tadlock (Director, Graduate Student Services):

Council of Graduate Schools: Katie informed Graduate Council that the Council of Graduate School award notices will be sent out shortly and that departments can think of nominees.

Program Codes:  Katie said that she will be sending a list of program codes to the Associate Deans and that if there are any changes they can send those back to her.  These codes will be in the new online and paper applications.

Commencement: Katie said that she looks forward to seeing everyone at commencement next Friday.

4.      Curriculum Committee:

M.S. (Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engineering): Scott Carson said that there are two aspects to each new proposal that is submitted, the academic and administration/financial aspect.  We are more competent to pronounce upon the academic aspect versus the financial viability of the program.  The chair of the IMSE department is working with Jack Bantle’s office on budgetary issues of the program.  Duncan added that a better division of tasks between the University International Council and Graduate Council will ensure a comprehensive evaluation of such proposals.  Questions about where most of the courses would be taught and by who were answered by Dr. David Koonce.  He said that some courses will be taught by adjunct faculty, but all courses will be conducted at the Athens campus.  Josie sought clarification regarding the nature of the ‘cohort’.  David said that some courses will only have the Chinese students, while other courses will comprise of the Chinese students and the Engineering Management students.  As with any other cohort, the entire group of Chinese students will take classes together, they will not be dispersed into different sections. 

Michael added that this proposal and the one presented last month (MFE at Tianjin University) are results of our recruitment endeavor.  Duncan said this is yet another example that can be used to lobby for base funding for international recruitment.  The motion to approve the program was passed.  It was noted that the reservations that Graduate Council has about the financial aspects of the course are being handled by another department at the University. 

5.      Admissions Requirements Committee:

1. Non-degree seeking students: Josie said that the three cases that had been tabled previously are being presented today.  She reminded everyone of the Graduate Council decision of ruling on those conflict of interest reviews since it did not seem fair to make those people wait for such an extended period of time.  Pat said that many of their non-degree seeking students are employees.  Duncan responded that a clause can be added to the review form which states that if students enrolled in the non-degree program ever want to pursue a degree, the conflict of interest application would not be approved.  Katie said that as of now as well, the letter that is sent to students after their conflict of interest application is approved states that any change in their employment and degree seeking status will necessitate another review. 

Duncan further noted that per new policy, it is clear that these reviews would be considered to have a conflict of interest, but under the current policy, it is ambiguous.  Josie added that if some one is seeking a non-degree option, it should not be an issue.  Maureen said that she would like to see a way to ensure that the credits taken are not graded credits.  If this can be reflected on their transcripts, in a way that they might receive a grade, but not be counted as an OU course.  In essence, a mechanism should be in place that treats a non-degree course as a non-degree course.  Duncan said that it is strange that we treat the non-degree seeking students the same way we treat a Group 1 faculty wanting to start a Ph.D. program.  Catherine said that very often people dabble with the non-degree option just to see if they are interested in that area or not.  Pat said that based on what we discussed above, doesn’t that involve another review?  Katie responded that it is possible for someone to slip through.  She said that most of the students pursuing the Master’s degree in Higher Education start as non-degree students and then convert to the degree seeking option. 

Maureen asked if it is possible for students to audit the class instead of registering for it.  Katie said that in that case the employee benefits do not kick in.  Lee added that the certificate programs offered in the College of Health and Human Services are non-degree and that if these courses are not graded, students do not receive their certificates.  Chris suggested having a new degree code, such as ‘NDA’ and ‘NDA-’, that would identify the nature of the course taken.  Catherine said that she would be interested in Deb Benton’s response to that.  Duncan said that this clearly warrants more discussion, specially if the Provost does not sign the resolution.  Maureen said she feels uncomfortable ruling a no-conflict on these unless there is a mechanism in place to keep the non-degree courses taken clearly identifiable.  Katie said there is an 18 credit hours limit and a hold goes on the student’s record preventing them to register for any future credits unless the hold is removed.  The only issue is of tracking those students and if we know who we are looking for, it is very easy to do so.       

2. Proposals tabled previously: Based on the recommendation of the Admissions Requirements Committee Graduate Council voted that a conflict of interest exists for Ryan Clark and Elahu Gosney.  Lee said that for Gerard Akindes seeking an I.I.P., the College of Health and Human Services cannot be the primary college because they do not offer a Ph.D. degree.  Josie added that his academic advisor and administrative supervisor are different.  Lee clarified that Gerard Akindes’ supervisor, Douglas Franklin is an administrator, not a faculty, so he cannot be Gerard’s academic advisor.  The motion to rule this one as a no-conflict was passed. 
3. New Cases: Among the new conflict of interest reviews, Ralph Amos, Virginia Hojas, Kevin Kuwik, Krista McCallum Beatty were approved.  Josie requested everyone to read Tony Adami’s case.  Jerrel added that many other similar cases have been approved in the past and Tony does not have any faculty responsibilities.  Duncan agreed and said it would be churlish to not approve his extension.  Graduate Council voted for a no-conflict. 

6.      Planning and Strategy Committee:            

1. Leave of Absence Policy:

a)      Need for it and impact on current students: Jesse asked if the students who are already enrolled in a program would be grandfathered under the existing policy.  Katie responded that since at present there is no registration maintenance or similar fee and there is no formal leave of absence policy either, students who are not taking classes assume that they have taken a leave of absence.  Pat said that their department uses the phrase ‘leave of absence’, when the Faculty require a student to take time off.  Susan added that there is an internal policy in place for such situations.  Ginger said that the new policy seems complementary to what already exists.  Jerrel asked why do we require such a policy?  Katie responded saying that students ask for it and we do not have a formal process to deal with that.  A student who requires time off for certain reasons should be treated differently from someone who just dropped out of sight.  Currently there is no guidance about handling that.  Catherine said that a policy like that is very useful specially when a student has a sick parent.  Duncan said that they are not going to move forward on establishing a continuous registration policy due to some SEVIS issues.  Jerrel commented on the nature policy would then be on a volunteer basis and that a student might not ask for it.  Maureen asked what would happen if a student did not ask for it and that there is no progress being made either towards their degree.  Katie responded saying then it would be the same as it is now, and that the department can ask for the student to be dropped from the program.  Pat said that this seems to put students in a vulnerable situation.  Katie said that the fifth paragraph can be eliminated so that the policy does not sound so punitive. 

b)      Re-entry process: David Juedes asked about the re-entry process, particularly for those students who have had psychological problems.  He said that it is important to know whether the students are ready to come back to school.  Katie informed them about medical withdrawal.  She said that a medical hold is placed on the student’s record by counseling services and the student needs clearance from them before registration.  Duncan said that in his experience there has been only one student who was required to have psychological clearance.  He also added that about 50% of the students in his program are international students and that he refers them to ISFS to find out about appropriate documentation required.  Katie said that maybe a letter from the university stating that they are permitted to take this leave of absence might be helpful for international students given their visa restrictions.  Joe said that a document like that is helpful because otherwise there is only a very short period of time that an international student can be away.      

c)      One time only process: Jesse asked if the leave of absence is a one time affair or it could be extended?  David Mould asked that the catalog policy of having seven years for the completion of a degree would include the time taken off for a leave of absence?  Maureen said that the language of the policy should also provide an explanation of reasons for which a leave of absence can be sought.  Jesse asked if having such a list would be narrowing the options for students, given that it would be difficult to have an exhaustive all inclusive list.  Catherine said that the list will not be treated as prescriptive. 

d)      When to apply: Ginger said that the vagueness of the language in the third line of the second paragraph bothers her.  She said that students might request the leave of absence the day they want to leave.  Catherine said that they can qualify the word ‘prior’ by saying that it has to be done say before the eighth week of the quarter.  Maureen responded saying that if it is an emergency, a student would not know of it before hand.  Lee said that they can say that ideally leaves of absence should be requested in advance.  Susan framed the sentence by saying that all foreseeable leaves of absence should be requested prior to leaving campus.  David Mould also suggested that the College office should also receive a copy of the leave of absence approval or denial.  The revised leave of absence policy was approved by Graduate Council. 

2. English Language Proficiency Policy: Katie said that per the previous meeting the document had to be revised.  She said that she, Michael, Joe, and Dave Drabold met to discuss the revisions.  She further added that international students always ask for a minimum score required.  Dina said that some departments require a higher score than others, e.g., Environmental Studies requires 600.  Maureen asked if the catalog mentions a minimum score.  Katie said that it does, it is 550, but it is ignored many a time.  Michael said that as of now we follow departmental recommendations, but Graduate Studies may not approve an admission on the basis of a lower score.  Maureen said that departments should know about it before a new policy goes into place.  Michael said that a large number of departments admit students with scores between 500 and 550, occasionally departments want to admit students with a score below 500.  Maureen noted that the new policy is not really changing all that much, it is simply solidifying and clarifying current policy.  Katie added that we are protecting the student by denying admission on a low score because if a student comes with a low score, they have to take OPIE courses.  For international students it thus turns out to be very expensive. 

David Juedes asked about the equivalent scores on the IELTS scale.  Katie said that the OU test scores usually are within a small variation of a student’s TOEFL score.  Jesse expressed concern over the possible situation for a student who does not take the TOEFL before coming to OU and then fails the English proficiency test taken at OU.  Pat added that the some students from a few African colleges have good verbal skills but do not do well on the OU test.  Susan said that it is almost a legal issue that should be clarified to students before they arrive that if they do not pass the OU English test, they will not be eligible to start their graduate programs.  Katie said that they want to avoid the double testing, because test scores show that students test within a very small range of their original TOEFL scores.  Susan asked if there was a time limit in place for the point that states that if a student has received a bachelors degree from an accredited institution in the United States or a foreign college or university accredited by a Regional U.S accrediting organization (where English is the language of instruction).  Katie said that it could be the same as that for TOEFL, which is two years.  Maureen asked when this policy would go into effect.  Katie said this will be in the new graduate catalog (2005-2007).  Katie seconded Catherine idea, about voting electronically in light of the multiple changes made in this document.  Duncan added that he would use the majority vote to determine whether the revised document is passed or not. 

The meeting was adjourned at 5:14 pm. 

Next meeting on September 9^th, 2-4 pm, The Governance Room in Walter Hall.