Millersville University, Faculty Senate


Faculty Senate Meeting

5 April 1994

Chairperson D. Eidam called the meeting to order at 4:10 p.m. in Chryst Hall Room 210. All departments except Political Science and Social Work were represented. Student Senate was represented by J. Haugh, T. Cawley, N. George, and E. Kobeski. Brian Weaver attended for The Snapper.


The 15 March minutes were approved as read with Chairperson Eidam stressing his responsibility for creating the annual report form for standing committees (p. 3570)



D. Eidam announced the first, and perhaps, only summer meeting of the Senate will be Tuesday, 14 June, from 2:30 to 4:00 p.m. in McComsey's Myers Auditorium where no refreshments are permitted. He placed Registrar Gonzalez's report on the new MU Transcript and CIT VP Mordosky's discussion of the campus network on the 3 May agenda. He reported the Deans' Council has returned to their agenda discussion of departmental policies on admission, retention, and graduation requirements pending the Faculty Senate's discourse on the issue (see Deans' Council Notes 3/9/94). Chairperson Eidam directed the Senate Policies Review Committee, chaired by Senator Schneller, to add to their agenda examination of a potential overlap in activities and duties of the General Education Review and Outcomes Assessment committees. Senator E. Ottinger, chair of Outcomes Assessment, has been asked to consult by SPRC on this matter. He reminded Senators that ten departments need to elect Senators for the 1994-97 terms between April 1 and May 31. A department may designate more than one alternate. Finally, Chairperson Eidam said that although there are occasional requests from Senators to vote by proxy, Robert's Rules does not permit it unless prescribed by by-laws. Our by-laws presently contain no such provision.

Student Senate

President J. Haugh announced the Student elections of April 6, 1994. He said Student Senate is currently working on a campus security telephone poll for a report to the Council of Trustees, April 20; on a debate among SSHE Student Senators on SSHE issues for their April 16-17 program; and in discussion on increasing student involvement on campus committees.

Adminstrative Officers


Dr. Caputo said he would be involved in several meetings beginning April 6; some of which will include Capital Campaign fundraising activities.

Vice-President for Academic Affairs

Dr. Taggie reported the state and local APSCUF units have approved Dr. K. Gregoire for a third year as Acting Assistant Provost. Because she has accepted, the search for an Assistant Provost is suspended. Dr. Taggie thanked Senator K. Brooks for having agreed to serve on the committee and Chairperson Eidam for having arranged Senate's role in the search.

Vice-President for Finance and Administration

Dr. B. Rydell spoke to the Senate on the matter of student fees (p. 3538) and made available, (as Attachment A), a breakdown of the General fee by component for fall 1993. She explained the General Fee is composed of five parts: 1) student Activities Fee (voted on by Student Senate); 2) Student Center Expansion Bonds; 3) Student Center Operations Fee; 4) Health Services Fee; 5) Academic Support Fee (for academic equipment, educaional supplies, and library materials and administration), which is limited by SSHE policy to 10% of tuition. On a per credit basis, the total General Fee, which is incremental, is $33.75 per credit or $398 for 12 credits or above. Responding to the notion that MU fees were higher than those of other institutions, Dr. Rydell said that among the eleven state universities surveyed, MU ranks 6th in costliness for students taking a 2 or 3 credit course. Over half of the downtown students take only 1 to 3 credit courses, so MU's three-credit course cost is less than over half of the other SSHE schools'. In addition, Dr. Rydell said 43% of downtown students also took courses on campus. She observed that while the Penn State Harrisburg and York campuses as well as HACC do indeed charge minimal fees ($12 and $4 respectively), students receive practically no services. In fact, she said, HACC has approached MU about extending our services and activities to their students. Closing her report with an indication of the questions she and Dr. Reighard, Vice-President for student Affairs, are considering on the fee issue, Dr. Rydell opened up the floor for discussion. Senator R. Clark noted the need to consider the fees for those who might be enrolled in the proposed College of Lifelong Learning (p. 3571). Senator K. Brooks asked if downtown students were aware of the services and if it was known if they use them. Dr. Rydell responded with a brief overview descibing the Literature students receive and she said perhaps some improvements could be made to those documents.

Acting Assistant Provost

Dr. K. Gregoire reminded Senators of pre-registration. She said volunteer advisors were needed particularly in Science, Math, and the Humanities. Interested faculty should call Mrs. Kendig (x2144) or notify their chairs.

Committe Reports

Joint Senate Conference

Senator S. Luek was recognized to report the results of the Joint Senate Conference Committee's decision on the registration by credit-only proposal introduced on April 20, 1993 and referred to their committee May 4, 1993 (p. 3448). In those discussions, it was agreed Registrar M. Gonzalez should have an opportunity to implement his ideas for revising the registration process and it was agreed he would consult with the committee (see Attachment B). Having completed their review process, the committee agreed the motion to change the registration process should be denied. Senator Luek moved against the motion to amend the registrarion process (p. 3431). The motion to defeat the amendment was passed without dissent.


Senator C. McLeod introduced COMM 224, COMM 322, COMM 324, COMM 429 and ITEC 375 under the three-meeting rule. All five of these courses are three-credit, new, non-General Education, to be first offered Fall 1994 if approved. He next placed a Retention Policy from the Communications Department on the 19 April agenda. Senator Clark (seconded by Senator Thompson) moved action on the retention policy be delayed until the Academic Policies made its report on "Admission, Retention, and Graduation Requirements." The motion to postpone failed (see Attachment C).

General Education Review

Dr. Michael Knight's consultation visit included dialogue with interested faculty, students, and administrators. General Education Review extends thanks to all those who participated. His follow-up report will be forthcoming in April 1994. It will be distributed to the faculty, administration, and Student Senate.

Since the General education program is fully implemented and in response to student input during the consultation visit, and upon a verbal suggestion or response from Dr. Knight, members of General Education Review (Drs. Wismer, Schultz, and Gregoire) are developing a survey to help identify the implications (if any) of student inability to obtain the specific GEN ED courses for which they plan to register.

Since Fall 1993, General Education Review has been reviewing "P" course syllabi; in light of the criteria established for perspective courses at Millersville Universtity. Some general comments related to the syllabi overview are:

Noted variation in enrollments i.e., 14 students to 51 students in a section even though "P" courses are, according to definition, to be kept "small." At a fall meeting, Dr. Stager identified 25 students/section to be a reasonable number from an implementation standpoint. Faculty also need to be reminded about arbitrarily enlarging class sections as this might hinder essential goals of these types of courses. By 1995-96, it is projected that 40 sections/semester of perspectives will be needed at enrollment of 25 students per section.

In many syllabi there is no identification of the General Prerequisites for "P" courses. These are completion of English composition and 24 hours of the Liberal Arts Core according to the MU Goverance Manual. On a similar note, most "P" courses identified in the class schedule, which students use to select courses at registration, do not indicate general prerequisities. Since Perspective courses are determined to be "advanced studies" courses, designated 300 or above, awareness and indentification of those prerequisites are essential.

Variation was also noted in the "perspective" syllabi with regard to specification of course objectives, and means of evaluation of the course objectives. Assessment of outcomes is not possible within courses if there is not a clear delineation of expectations within a course over a 15 week (semester) time frame, or whatever period in which a course is offered. If faculty do not specify the intent in form of measurable objectives, students subsequently will be unaware of the expectations within the course.

It should be noted that at time of approval by the Undergraduate Course and Program Approval Committee, course syllabi are more carefully structured. This approved structure is not always translated into the course syllabi or format which is given to students when the course is actually taught.

In his consultation visit, Dr. Knight and General Education Review members discussed ways to maintain the commitment to the intended "ideal" of GEN ED (i.e., Perspective) courses. Some examples include regular participation in educational programs for faculty teaching "Perspective" courses, forms of academic currency as recognition for faculty who teach what should be labor intensive courses - letter of commenation, dollars, developing of a professional conclave of faculty involved in this endeavor.

To summarize, there may be a gap between what we propose to offer in terms of "Perspectives" and what is actually being delivered. On an optimistic note in the review process, this appears to be a "bridge-able" gap and according to Dr. Knight, not an unexpected situation in a new program. General Education Review also hopes to provide a literature summary on national trends in interdisciplinary courses at a future meeting.

The next meeting of General Education Review is April 12, 1994. Dr. R. Fulmer has graciously offered to convene since the Chair will be involved with the Nursing Department's National League for Nursing re-accreditation visit April 11-15, 1994. At this meeting, members will discuss aspects of Dr. Knight's consultation visit.

In response to GERC's finding concerning absence of "P" prerequisites in class scheduling booklets, the Senate approved a Wismer-Liffick, after a friendly amendment by Senator B. Dorman, to have the Registrar's Office place "P" prerequisite information whereever they deem appropriate in the course schedule booklet.

Theme Committee

Senator J. Piperberg reported the Theme Committee met twice in March and again on April 4 to select the 1996-7 Academic Theme. "Preparing for Life in the 21st Century" was assembled to incorporate aspects of all four theme proposals received in February 1994. Approval of the theme was placed on the next agenda.

Proposed Courses

Chairperson Eidam recognized Senator C. Stameshkin who reported she and Senator B. Schneller had met and agreed on revisions to PHIL 391 (see p. 3572). Senator J. Piperberg (seconded by Senator S. Thompson) moved BIOL 241 and BIOL 242 be approved in their second meeting to facility summer 1994 enrollment. The motion carried. Senator S. Luek (seconded by Senator J. Piperberg), then moved early approval of PSYC 328 to create another Perspectives course offering for Fall 1994. This motion was also approved.

Senator B. Dorman was recognized and he raised three objections to ENGL 318: Technical Skills for Journalists. Indicating this was not a "turf battle", he observed concentration on interview should already be done in 100- and 200-level journalism classes; the instruction in desk top publishing appears to overlap with ITEC 356: Desktop Publishing; and htat five weeks focus on basic skills was too much for a 300-level course. Chairperson Eidam directed Senators Dorman and Scheller to contact the appropriate departmental faculty members for a discussion of these observations.


IX. Academic Amnesty Policy

At 5:10 p.m., the Senate resumed debate of the Academic Amnesty Policy (p. 3539). A McLeod-Wismer motion to substitute Senator McLeod's proposal for alternative wording (p. 3576) was introduced, but due to time constraints and the nature of the debate, no action could be taken on the motion and the matter was returned to the April 19 agenda. New issues raised included how "D" grades would be counted in the Q.P.A. and on transcripts; how academic amnesty would be shown on a transript; if it is possible a student could graduate with less than a 2.0 Q.P.A. because of academic amnesty, and should there be policies concerning academic amnesty already implemented in other universities, if these might already be presented in the Senate. Chairperson Eidam ruled at 5:45 p.m. the matter must be returned to the next agenda and said he would entertain a motion to limit debate. Senators Brooks, Nakhai, Liffick, Margolis, Wismer, Piperberg, Dorman, Clark, Iglesias, and Thompson participated in the day's discourse.

At 5:47 p.m., a Dorman-Piperberg motion to adjourn was heard.

The next meeting of the Faculty Senate is 19 April 1994 at 4:05 p.m. in Chryst Hall Room 210.

Respectfully submitted,

Beverly Schneller, Secretary,
Faculty Senate

Return to Faculty Senate Home Page
Return to Millersville University Home Page