R. Bell, S. Bhuyan, R. Bumby, J. Burton,
J. Cassel, T. Chase, C. Chinn, M. Cotter, A. Farmer, S. Gifford,
D. Gimenez, M. Gliserman, H. Hirsh, F. Kauffman, J. Krenos, U. Linke, J.
Matthewson, J. Miklojcif, D. Minch, H. Mokros, C. Nanry, J. Niessen,
D. O’Connor, P. Panayotatos, R. Reid, H. Rockoff, D. Schilling,
K. Scott, M. Siewierski, C. Sims, N. Sinha, B. Smith, T. Szatrowski, A.
Walker-Andrews, J. Walkup, C. Weibel.
|1.||Call to Order
F. Kauffman called the meeting to order at 1: 35 PM in Brower Commons ABC, College Avenue Campus.
|2.||Approval of the Agenda and Acceptance of the Minutes of the March
14, 2003 Meeting.
The Agenda and Minutes of the March 14, 2003 meeting were approved.
|3.||Report of the Chair - Frederick C. Kauffman
|4.||Interim Report of the Academic
Services Committee on Double Majors - Charles Sims
Professor Sims indicated that the practice of undergraduates obtaining double majors, and regulations to this practice were quite heterogeneous across University departments and programs. There are no formal guidelines printed in the catalogue regarding double majors. He indicated that students and faculty have difficulty obtaining information concerning this practice. Information is not readily available for students and faculty. Students in some departments apparently can add majors as they choose. The record is apparently 6 majors held by one student. Diplomas list only the degree of a student’s primary major; a student’s transcript lists all majors. It is clear that there are clear advantages for students to have double majors e.g., Chemistry and Molecular Biology, Computer Science and Mathematics, Statistics and Bioinformatics., whereas, other departments and schools discourage double majors, e.g., Mason Gross. Overlap of courses occurs frequently and alternate courses to fulfill requirements of replicate majors are not well established.
After considerable discussion, the consensus of the Council was that while a standard policy concerning double majors could not be developed, the following steps should be considered:
1) Develop statistics on the actual numbers of students with double majors on the New Brunswick/Piscataway campuses. 2) Establish guidelines dealing with overlapping courses in double majors.
|5.||Report of the Academic Regulations and Standards Committee on
Academic Integrity - Rudy Bell
Prof. Bell stated that the radically expanding use of web-based resources in scholarship was a major argument for evaluating and updating the university code on academic integrity. The Report of the committee and resolution can be found at: http://nbfc.rutgers.edu/IntegrityRpt.htm . The Committee viewed the internet plagiarism issue to be the most timely, fundamental and critical of the academic integrity issues that we face. Nonetheless, there appears to be no groundswell for a substantially revised policy. The voices we heard were divided, some calling for a less rigid policy and others for reduced discretion if discretion results in different outcomes for substantially similar offenses. More gathering of fact and opinion is in order. Consequently, the Committee made the following resolutions:
1) A copy of this report be forwarded to the University Senate for further consideration
2) The incoming Executive Vice-President for Academic Affairs appoint a university-wide committee including faculty, students, and administrators to review existing policy and to develop a “Best Practices” manual for all instructors, with appropriate sub-sections made widely available to students as well.
|6.||Report of the
PFAC – Paul Panayotatos, Martha Cotter and
Items not covered and scheduled for next meeting include:
An area of particular importance was the president’ desire to enhance faculty input into development of budget priorities. He requiested two processes of fostering faculty input:
First, for the Provosts and the UVPAA to receive input from campus-level bodies (such as the NBFC) on areas and priorities to be protected from budget cuts.P.N.P indicated that the PFAC was given figures on the University Sports Budget and shared some of the numbers with the Council.
AW-A. indicated that the faculty has zero input into admissions and asked if R.M. thought it a good idea to bring up this issue up again with the University Senate Committee on Admissions. R.M responded in the affirmative.
Other issues: 1) Dr. Vagelos' visit to Camden was cut back because of difficult weather and the Q&A portion to his presentation was cut to 8 minutes. 2) Although open transparency is advocated by R.M, there has been some delay in conveying this idea to deans.
K. Scott presented a summary of the Senate’s Committee on University Structure and Governance resolution on developing a contract between institutions of higher education in N.J. and the Governor. The object of this resolution is to develop stable and sustained state support for specific missions of the university.
M. Cotter presented an updated report of the ongoing collective bargaining between the AAUP and the University.
The meeting adjourned at 3:30PM.