Academic Council Minutes, February 23, 2005

I.   Minutes

--Approved with correction 

II.  General Agenda 

• Data Collection

--Spring enrollment figures were noted.

• Instructional Technology/Online Issues and Updates

--It was noted that ITV usage data indicated courses scheduled but not necessarily taught.  The number scheduled was considered useful nonetheless.  IT will provide both numbers in the future—scheduled and actually taught. 

--The chat-room feature in Vista remains unreliable and unpredictable.  WebCT fixes have not yet solved the problem.  Both UH and WebCT are trying to address the chat issues. 

• Fort Bend Issues and Updates

--Distance education and technology representatives met to discuss needs and budget recommendations and will forward the latter for consideration. 

• Other

--Draft version of procedures for giving students credit for courses taken abroad as part of the MSU consortium in which UHV is now participating.  The procedures will be brought back to the Council following opportunity to study them further.  It was noted that the following provisions need to be in place: 

• Academic school review in advance to ensure that the student proposing to take a given course understands whether it can be counted as—

1.  A degree-program requirement;

2.  A designated elective in the degree program;

3.  Or a free elective.

• In that the course(s) would be counted as if UHV’s own, rather than as transfer courses, accreditation issues could arise with regard to course expectations and faculty credentials.  So, there needs to be some way of verifying that these do meet SACS criteria, since UHV is accountable for the academic credit it awards. (It is possible that other consortium institutions have already found a way to address this issue.)
   
• In general, appeals related to institution-wide policies go directly to the Council (e.g., undergraduate admission appeals), whereas appeals that relate at least initially to school policies or processes go first to the dean (e.g., grade appeals or graduate admission appeals).

III.    Specific Agenda 

·        Student Appeal 

--A student request to participate in commencement ceremonies prior to completing degree requirements was denied. 

·        Faculty Development Requests and Reports 

--Approved a development grant for conference presentation ($1,000) to Dr. Joseph Ben-Ur to the 2005 International Conference on Political Marketing, in Kastoria, Greece, in March. 

--Approved a research grant ($1,000) for Dr. Paul Carlson for manuscript preparation for a book contract with Allyn and Bacon for text in Multicultural Education. 

--Approved a development grant for conference presentation ($352.40) to Dr. Estella De Los Santos to the Southwest Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, in New Orleans, LA, in February. 

--Approved a development grant for conference presentation ($770) to Dr. Linda Hayes to the 32^nd Annual Meeting of the Federation of Business Disciplines, in Dallas, TX, in March. 

--Approved a development grant for conference presentation ($352.40) to Dr. Barba Patton to the Southwest Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, in New Orleans, LA, in February. 

--Approved a development grant for conference presentation ($1,000) to Dr. Cindy Schnebly to the 2005 Narrative Conference, in Louisville, KY, in April. 

--Approved a development grant for conference presentation ($882) to Dr. Harold Smith to the Western Social Science Association Annual Conference, in Albuquerque, NM, in April. 

--Approved a development grant for conference presentation ($550) to Dr. Andria Young to the Instructional Technology Council 2005 e-Learning Conference, in Dallas, TX, in April. 

--Approved a development grant for conference presentation ($1,000) to Dr. Qi Zhu to the 5^th International Conference on Computational Science 2005, in Atlanta, GA, in May. 

v     Since the research fund was running out of money, the provost indicated that funds from a remaining SACS account could be used to cover the shortfall for this year [Provost note: this account is unlikely to have any money in it next year]. 

·        Academic Program Review 

--The Council considered the report of the joint committee on the three programs under review this year, noting that the committee commended the standardization of the review process and the completeness of the information provided.  Issues discussed included the following: 

a.       How library resources and other learning resources are being considered in the review process (provost is to check on the status of surveys used) 

b.      Whether the review process fulfills a substantive function as well as a compliance one  

c.       Whether the process can be completed in a more timely way 

d.      How accountability should be defined and implemented in processes involving shared governance (provost is to provide language for consideration by the Council and Senate—to be put in the Faculty Manual upon approval) 

DNS/kw
2/24/05