The meeting was called to order by President Paul Olum in Room 150
Geology at 3:35 p.m., February 1, 1984. There being no corrections, the
minutes of the January 11, 1984 meeting were approved as distributed.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Recently the University's budget for 1984-85 was cut by the Oregon State Board of Higher Education. President Olum, in response to this cut, presented the following information in his State of the University discussion. The basic goal is to make the minimum impact on faculty, on library books, and on the educational program. The President stated that "No declaration of financial exigency" would be made. The possibility that some "roll over" contracts might not be renewed exists, but the effort to cut the budget will be made in attempting to not fill faculty vacancies or delay in appointing faculty to fill vacancies.
"I. Budget Discussion A. Reduction for 1983-84 which carries forward $1,200,000 -Additional reduction for 1984-85 1,083,000
Total reduction for 1984-85 $2,283,000.
These cuts will be made in the following areas:
Tentative 1984-85 Budget Reduction Plan
1. Reduction of Faculty Positions (20 FTE) $ 500,000
2. 1984-85 Salary Savings (Faculty and Staff) 480,000
3. Equipment (40% of total) 200,000
4. Service and Supplies Inflation (50% of total) 100,000
5. OPE Savings 250,000
6. Administrative Area Savings 200,000
7. Energy Savings 350,000
8. Carry Forward Savings from 1983-84 200,000
- $2,280,000
The Problem:
$1,200,000 Reduction Carried Forward from 1983-84
1,083,000 Additional Reduction for 1984-85
.
$2,283,000
Budget Restoration Priorities will be item 1 and 3.
In his discussion on the budget President Olum stated that the reductions will not come without pain and without sacrifice. The University is tremendously underfunded and the miracle is that the quality of the institution has continued to survive under a series of devastating fiscal blows over the past few years.
The President recognized the Secretary to make a statement on the Charles Johnson Award. Faculty nominations for this award are being sought by the Committee. Send nominations with back-up information to support the nomination to Mr. Sanford Tepfer, Biology.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
The President recognized Mr. Gerald Bogen, Education. Mr. Bogen made a motion to Lay on the Table the first item on the agenda. The President explained that this was not debatable and required a simple majority. The motion was passed by a voice vote.
The President recognized Mr. James Boren, English, who read the following
motion:
''Establishment of
a Committee on Motions and Resolutions
"1) The present University Senate shall be replaced by a Standing Committee on Motions and Resolutions; the function of this committee will be to put motions and resolutions in proper form, eliminate duplication where similar motions and resolutions are offered, and to ensure that all motions and resolutions relating to a specific subject will be offered in a logical sequence. The Committee is given the authority to make substantive alterations in a motion or resolution, but only with the sponsor's consent. The Committee may further, even without the sponsor's consent, propose amendments to the motion or resolution for the Assembly's consideration. The Committee will also ascertain, where appropriate, the fiscal impact of a proposed motion or resolution. It is not intended that the Committee recommend to the full Assembly either for or against passage of a motion or resolution, but it shall report on the pro and con arguments raised in its deliberations. "2) The Committee shall assume the function of the Senate as it relates to the Distinguished Service Award. "3) The Committee shall consist of eight (8) faculty members (appointed by the Committee on Committees) or (elected by the faculty at large), four (4) from the College of Arts and Sciences and four (4) from the Professional Schools, Library, Unaffiliated Faculty and Officers of Administration, plus the Parliamentarian (non-voting), the Secretary of the Assembly (non-voting), the Chair and Vice Chair of the Student University Affairs Board (or their designees). "4) The term of office for those eight (8) (appointed) or (elected) faculty members is two years, with two members from each group (College of Arts and Sciences and Professional Schools, Library, Unaffiliated Faculty and Officers of Administration) being replaced each year. For the first term of service, lots will be drawn to determine which two members from each group shall serve one year, and which two years; no one shall serve two consecutive terms. "5) Only those members eligible for election to the Faculty Advisory Council are eligible for (appointment) or (election) to the Committee on Motions and Resolutions. "6) If this motion is enacted by a vote of the Assembly it shall take effect after the close of the academic year 1983-84."
Mr. Boren explained that the Senate version of the motion, with
the positions as being elected, were not acceptable to Mr. Stanley Greenfield,
English, who was the author of the original motion. Mr. Greenfield did,
however, accept the changes in #l as presented above. Mr. George Bynon,
Secretary of the University Senate, gave the vote of the Senate as 27 in
favor, none opposed and no one abstaining. Mr. Robert Kime was recognized
to give the report of the Senate. He stated that the Senate altered the
motion, so that the members of the "Motions and Resolutions.' Committee
would have eight elected faculty members, that the Secretary and Parliamentarian
would be non-voting and with no change in the two student members. After
much discussion and voting down a proposal to double the size of the Committee,
the Senate voted on the motion.
Ms. Celeste Ulrich, College of Human Development and Performance, stated that she felt the proposal was an anachronistic way to lead faculty. She questioned the number of four faculty to represent the Professional Schools, Library, Unaffiliated Faculty and Officers of Administration while the College of Arts and Science would have four, also. Mr. Bogen made an amendment to the motion to make the Committee elected to remove any suggestion of appointed for the eight faculty positions. This was seconded and was accepted by a showing of hands. After a short discussion the motion was called for and was defeated: 40 yes and 61 no. The motion needed a two-thirds majority to pass.
Mr. Bogen made a motion to bring the first item on the agenda back into the business of the Assembly. The Assembly voted to remove the motion from the table.
Ms. Katherine Eaton, past Chair of the Committee on Committees, was recognized to read the following motion: "On behalf of the Committee on Committees, I move that faculty legislation establishing the Academic Requirements Committee (1923) and the Academic Standards Committee (1971-72) be amended to provide that the functions and responsibilities of the two committees be combined into one committee, that of Academic Requirements, effective 1983-84. There shall continue to be faculty, student and ex-officio members."
The vote of the Senate, given by Mr. George Bynon, was 4 in favor, 19 opposed and one abstention. Ms. Easton, in speaking to the motion, stated that the two committees would be more efficient if combined and that the Academic Standards Committee did not meet and seems to not have any work to do. Mr. John Sherwood, English, stated that he has served on both committees and that he opposed the motion very strongly. The two committees do have work to do, the Academic Requirements Committee, in fact, has more than enough to do without accepting more work. A strong Chair of the Standards Committee has made a difference in the working of that committee. The motion was called for and was defeated by a voice vote.
Mr. Paul Holbo, History, made a motion to adjourn. The motion passed and the Assembly adjourned at 5:07 p.m.
The following motion has been submitted for consideration of the Assembly at the March 7, 1984 meeting. Mr. Michael Prothe, SUAB Chair, has moved that: "On behalf of the Student University Affairs Board and the student body of the University of Oregon, I will introduce at the March 1984 University Assembly meeting a revised Semester Calendar plan with Fall term commencing no earlier than in September after Labor Day, and concluding in December. Spring Semester will begin no earlier than Mid-January and conclude in Mid-May. This calendar to take affect in the 1986-87 Academic Year upon approval of the University Assembly, and the State Board of Higher Education."
Keith Richard
Secretary, University Assembly
1. Application to present a SEARCH course must be made on a form
available from the SEARCH office. Additional information with regard to
the qualifications of the instructor, the contents of the course, and the
methodology to be used must also be provided. After careful review, the
application form should be signed by (a)the faculty sponsor, (b)the department
head, (c) either the dean of the college or school or the chair of the
college or school curriculum committee. If a course that has already been
approved by a department is denied at the college or school level, the
instructor and sponsoring faculty may appeal the decision to the University
Committee on the Curriculum.
2. Responsibility for approval of the instructor, credits, course level, course content, and scheduling of the SEARCH course will reside primarily with the signatories to the application form. The SEARCH office may offer advice in this regard.
3. If an undergraduate is proposed as the instructor, then the signatories must take care to provide evidence that this student is well qualified to teach the course. Only in rare cases, and after rigorous examination, should an undergraduate be allowed to teach a 400-level course.
4. A SEARCH course will be listed in the Time Schedule of Classes when approval has been received prior to the publication deadline (approximately seven weeks before the beginning of a new term). In cases where an instructor has had extensive prior preparation or experience, a SEARCH course submitted after that deadline may still be approved and taught.
5. In the event that a description of SEARCH courses to be taught is presented in an ASUO publication, there must be a clear distinction made between the ASUO/University-sponsored SEARCH courses per se and any ASUO sponsored non credit workshops.
6. The SEARCH office will assume managerial responsibilities for SEARCH courses. It will provide guidelines for SEARCH courses, hand out application forms, and review signatures on submitted applications. The Office of the Registrar will also check the application to see that the necessary signatures are present and will provide data on SEARCH for the Time Schedule of Classes.
7. Copies of all approved courses, with full supporting information, will be filed in the Office of the Provost. It will be the responsibility of the Office of the Registrar to see that this information is forwarded.
AMENDMENT TO SEARCH COURSES: "The collection of fees associated with SEARCH Courses will follow established University policies including those set forth in the Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR 571-60-005, 580-40-010, and 580-40-040). The Director of SEARCH will consult with the Director of Business Affairs about the procedures to be followed in establishing specific fees for courses."
AMENDMENT TO THE SEARCH MOTION: .'In the event that a non-credit SEARCH workshop is offered either for a fee or by an off-campus instructor (one that is neither a UO student nor a UO faculty), and in addition that workshop covers substantially the same grounds already covered by a course offered by an academic department on the UO campus, the SEARCH office must consult with that academic department and make sure that no curriculum overlap exists before authorizing the workshop."
RULES OF GOVERNANCE: "To codify as Rules of Governance, those proposals of the Task Force on Faculty Governance that do not require a vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the Assembly, since they do not constitute a basic change in the present system of governance."
MOTION TO RESTRUCTURE COMPOSITION OF CURRICULUM COMMITTEE: Quoted below is the current composition of the Curriculum Committee, as designated in faculty minutes dated December 5, 1934: "Three members, to be appointed for staggered three-year terms. No two from the same department, not more than two from the same college or school. When the committee is considering curricular proposals from a school not represented on the committee, the dean of that school or a designated representative is a member pro tem, with right to vote and make a minority report. The University Editor serves as secretary of the committee as an ex officio nonvoting member."
"On March 7, 1984, I will move that the composition of the Curriculum
Committee be altered by replacing the last sentence with the following:
"The Catalog Editor, the Registrar or a designated representative, and
the Director of Academic Advising or a designated representative serve
as ex officio nonvoting members."
The meeting was called to order by President Paul Olum in Room 150
Geology at 3:40 p.m., March 7, 1984. There being no corrections, the minutes
of the February 1, 1984 meeting were approved as distributed.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
No announcements were made.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS , President Olum recognized Ms. Mavis Mate, Chair of the Committee on the Curriculum, to read the following motion concerning SEARCH courses:
SEARCH Course Regulations.
"1. Application to present a SEARCH course must be made on a form available
from the SEARCH office. Additional information with regard to the qualifications
of the instructor, the contents of the course, and the methodology
to be used
must also be provided. After careful review, the application form should
be
signed by (a)the faculty sponsor, (b)the department head, (c)either
the dean of
the college or school or the Chair of the college or school curriculum
committee.
If a course that has already been approved by a department is denied
at the
college or school level, the instructor and sponsoring faculty may
appeal the
decision to the University committee on the curriculum.
"2. Responsibility for approval of the instructor, credits, course
level,
course content, and scheduling of the search course will reside primarily
with
the signatories to the application form. The SEARCH office may offer
advice
in this regard.
"3. If an undergraduate is proposed as the instructor, then the signatories
must take care to provide evidence that this student is well qualified
to
teach the course. Only in rare cases, and after rigorous examination,
should
an undergraduate be allowed to teach a 400-level course.
"4. A SEARCH course will be listed in the Time Schedule of Classes
when approval
has been received prior to the publication deadline (approximately
seven weeks
before the beginning of a new term). In cases where an instructor has
had
extensive prior preparation or experience, a SEARCH course submitted
after that
deadline may still be approved and taught.
"5. In the event that a description of SEARCH courses to be taught
is presented
in an ASUO publication, there must be a clear distinction made between
the
ASUO/University-sponsored SEARCH courses per se and any ASUO sponsored
non credit
workshops.
"6. The SEARCH office will assume managerial responsibilities for SEARCH
courses.
It will provide guidelines for SEARCH courses, hand out application
forms, and
review signatures on submitted applications. The Office of the Registrar
will
also check the application to see that the necessary signatures are
present and
will provide data on search for the Time Schedule of Classes.
"7. Copies of all approved courses, with full supporting information,
will
be filed in the office of the Provost. It will be the responsibility
of the
office of the Registrar to see that this information is forwarded."
Ms. Marliss Strange, Reporter for the University Senate, gave the vote of the Senate as 26 yes and 1 no. Ms. Mate spoke to the motion and said that the Curriculum Committee should deal with SEARCH courses and that the departments should scrutinize the proposed SEARCH courses thoroughly to make sure the courses are indeed worthwhile.
Mr. Richard Hill, Provost, was recognized to read an amendment to the motion: "The collection of fees associated with SEARCH courses will follow established University policies including those set forth in the Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR 571-60-005, 580-40-010, and 580-40-040). The Director of SEARCH will consult with the Director of Business Affairs about the procedures to be followed in establishing specific fees for courses."
After being seconded this amendment to the motion was called for and by a voice vote was passed.
President Olum announced that Mr. Tom Givon, Linguistics, had withdrawn his amendment to the SEARCH motion for the time being. This motion will be brought to the floor of the Assembly at the meeting of April 4. (The amendment is attached to these minutes.)
Mr. Paul Holbo, Vice Provost, offered the following motion that would be placed after the last sentence in Number 1 of the main motion: "Further appeal to the University Assembly shall be open to either party." This was seconded and by a voice vote the Assembly accepted this amendment. Mr. Holbo offered another amendment: "In number 3 the last sentence shall be removed and the following shall be substituted for it: 'The Provost must approve the teaching of a 400 level SEARCH course by an undergraduate'." This amendment failed to gain Assembly approval by a voice vote. Mr. Holbo presented a third amendment: "Add to number 3 the following: 'Instructors of SEARCH courses shall not be enrolled in the courses they teach'." The amendment was accepted by a voice vote of the Assembly.
The main motion, as amended, was now before the Assembly. The vote was positive and the motion was passed. The motion, as enacted, is attached to these minutes on page 5.
President Olum recognized Ms. Mavis Mate, Chair of the Committee on the Curriculum, to read the following motion on the structure of the Committee on the Curriculum. "The original legislation (December 5, 1934) creating the current committee states: 'Three members, to be appointed for staggered three-year terms. No two from the same department, nor more than two from the same college or school. When the committee is considering curricular proposals from a school not represented on the committee, the dean of that school or a designated representative is a member pro tem, with right to vote and make a minority report. The University Editor serves as secretary of the committee as an ex officio nonvoting member.' I move that the last sentence in this statement be replaced by the following: 'The Catalog Editor, the Registrar or a designated representative, and the Director of Academic Advising or a designated representative serve as ex officio nonvoting members'." Ms. Marliss Strange, reporter for the University Senate, gave the Senate vote on this change as 26 yes and 1 no. no's. Mate stated that the change would only make legitimate the present structure of the committee and that the University no longer has a position titled "University Editor."
Mr. Holbo asked why the statement contained the language that " the dean of that school or a designated representative is a member pro tem, with the right to vote and make a minority report." The Secretary explained that the 1934 legislation made the dean or designated representative "pro tem" members of the Committee. Normally pro tem members cannot vote or issue minority reports. This wording allowed the individual to vote and give a minority report. Mr. Holbo moved to amend the motion by having the words "minority report" stricken from the original legislation. This amendment failed by a voice vote. After a short discussion the motion was called for and passed by a voice vote.
Ms. Mavis Mate was recognized to read the following addition to the minor legislation enacted in February: "At least fifteen hours must be taken at the University of Oregon." Ms. Mate stated that the motion was needed if the University of Oregon was indeed going to be responsible for the giving of the minor. Ms. Marliss Strange, Academic Advising, stated that the minor appears on the transcript as issued by the University's Registrar. If no hours in the minor were taken at the University the official U of O transcript would not reflect that any courses were taken for the minor. This requirement would make clear that the minor was indeed partly earned by the student at the University of Oregon.
Mr. William Holser, Geology, questioned the need to require something for a minor that was not required for a major. Mr. Gordon Mallon, SUAB, made a motion to amend the motion so that the 15-hour requirement would read 12 hours. This was defeated by a voice vote. The motion was called for and by a voice vote it was defeated. The responsibility of establishing the criteria for a minor remains with the departments and they can adopt whatever criteria they wish.
At this point President Olum relinquished the Chair to Provost Richard Hill.
Mr. Hill recognized Mr. Mike Prothe, SUAB, to read the motion on Early Semester Alternative. "On behalf of the Student University Affairs Board and the Student Body of the University of Oregon, I move that a revised Semester Calendar plan with Fall term commencing no earlier than in September after Labor Day, and concluding in December, and with the Spring Semester beginning no earlier than mid-January and concluding in mid-May be adopted by the University Assembly. This calendar to make affect in the 1986-87 Academic Year after approval by the State Board of Higher Education.''
Ms. Louise Wade, reporter for the Senate, gave the vote of the Senate as 22 in favor, 3 opposed and 2 abstaining. Mr. Prothe, in speaking to the motion, gave a number of statistical reports that indicated strong student support for the proposed semester calendar. These statistics were gathered by direct questioning of students on the proposal. During the debate those who opposed the motion spoke about the weather in September, the cost of changing the calendar and all the academic class preparation that would result during a time of extreme stress because of the present budget difficulties. This would be an added burden to an already overburdened faculty. This is not time for extensive revision. Mr. Glen Love, English, proposed that a careful look at the true quarter system was needed that the University should move toward the implementation of the true quarter system and get rid of the corrupted quarter system we now have. Several individuals spoke in favor of the motion. The academic advantages to the students and faculty were pointed out as was the movement nation wide toward the early semester system. The weather was dismissed as not relevant when the true issue was the academic gain that would be made under the semester system. A motion to table the motion (needing a two-thirds vote) was defeated by a vote of 56 yes and 53 no. A motion to postpone consideration until the April 4 meeting of the Assembly was made and passed by a voice vote.
NEW BUSINESS The Chair was resumed by President Olum and he recognized Mr. Gordon Mallon, SUAB, to read the following notice of motion: "The University Assembly requests that the Chancellor of Higher Education ask the Emergency Board to allocate emergency funds to lessen the adverse effects of budget shortfalls on the State System of Higher Education."
The following notice of motion was given to the Secretary after the meeting adjourned and is here given to the members of the Assembly as notice that it will be on the agenda at the April 4 meeting. Mr. John Keana, Chemistry, moves that: "The University Assembly temporarily suspend its self imposed rule relating to mail ballot vote so that the final vote of the faculty pertaining to the semester change question will be by mail ballot."
The following amendment to the SEARCH legislation has been given to the Secretary. It will be on the agenda of the April 4 meeting. Mr. Tom Givon, Linguistics, moves that: "In the event that a non-credit SEARCH workshop covers substantially the same grounds already covered by a class offered through an existing department or program on the U of O campus, the SEARCH office must consult with the academic department or program in question before authorizing the workshop."
ADJOURNMENT
With the postponement of further consideration of the motion on the revised early semester system until the meeting of the Assembly on April 4, 1984 the Assembly adjourned. The first item of business on the April 4 agenda will be the revised early semester system and debate will commence as soon as the Assembly reaches the business portion of the agenda.
Keith Richard Secretary, University Assembly
The meeting was called to order by Vice President and Provost Richard
Hill in room 150 Geology at 3:28 p.m., June 6, 1984. There being no corrections,
the minutes of the May 2, 1984 meeting were approved as distributed.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Provost Hill recognized Ms. Shirley Wilson, Chair of the Faculty Advisory Council, to read the annual report of the Advisory Council. The report is attached to these minutes as Appendix I.
Provost Hill recognized Mr. Robert Mazo, Chair of the Faculty Personnel Committee, to read the annual report of that committee. The report is attached to these minutes as Appendix II.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Provost Hill attempted to recognize someone from SUAB to sponsor the previous motion of Mr. Gordon Mellon concerning a resolution to the Chancellor to appeal to the Emergency Board for additional funding for the State System.
No person from SUAB wished to accept the sponsorship. Since the motion had been made and was on the floor, Mr. Stanley Greenfield, English, moved that the motion be tabled. This was passed by a voice vote.
Provost Hill recognized Mr. Ken Viegas, carrying the sponsorship of
the
Amendment to the Student Conduct Code for the
Student Conduct Committee.
Show Cause Proceedings
571-21-071 To enforce timely completion of sanctions imposed under this Code, a routine review of cases involving delinquency in compliance is provided by the show cause proceedings described below.
Provost Hill recognized Ms. Barbara Clarke-Mossburg to read the motion on American Studies. (An outline of the motion is attached to these minutes as Appendix IV.) Ms. Louise Wade, History, was recognized to give the report and vote of the Senate. The Senate endorsed the program by a vote of 21 yes, 1 opposed and 7 abstaining. The Senate was strongly in favor of the passage of this motion as it will create a new excitement in the curriculum, with a bare minimum of capital investment, and will create an excellent degree option for the students. The budget for the program is not set and will not be until the request for the 1985-87 budget is made. Mr. William Cadbury, Speech, made a motion to amend the document throughout to read "United States Studies" in place of "American Studies." This was defeated by a voice vote. The entire American Studies program was put to a vote and passed by the Assembly without a dissenting voice.
At this time President Olum arrived, he had been in Portland during the day, and assumed the Chair. Mr. Michael Utsey was recognized to read the following motion: "The Admissions Policy Committee shall be suspended as a faculty standing committee. At such time as the Assembly requires reviews of the performance of the new Fall 1985 admissions standards, or other admissions policy matters, the Committee shall be re-appointed with ad hoc status."
Aftet a short discussion this was put to a vote and passed.
At.this time a discussion on the "Workload Memorandum" sent out by the President earlier took place.
NEW BUSINESS
None.
ADJOURNMENT
The Assembly adjourned at 5:07 p.m. The next meeting of the University Assembly will be on October 3, 1984.
Keith Richard Secretary, University Assembly
The Faculty Advisory Council is made up of eight faculty members,
elected at large, who serve in an advisory capacity to the President and
Provost of the University. Although there are a few functions which are
clearly the responsibility of the Council (such as appointment of faculty
to several standing committees and advisory hoards), the Council's main
purpose is to convey faculty views to the President and Provost and, at
the same time, to act as a sounding board for the President and Provost
in discussing matters of concern to the central administration of the University.
To accomplish this two-way communication, the Council and the University President and Provost meet each week for a two- to three-hour period. Special meetings are called as necessary. Members of this year's Council would like to use the occasion of this Annual P.Report to faculty to encourage all faculty to talk directly to Council members about their concerns throughout the coming year.
A summary of the year's activities follows:
For me, one of the greatest values of the Faculty Advisory Council is the opportunity that it provides for eight faculty colleagues, each from a different discipline, to meet with the President and Provost in discussion and debate of the many issues facing the University of Oregon. It has been a wonderful learning experience and I recommend it to others who have not yet served in this phase of our governance system.1. Budget cuts have dominated discussions among the Council, President, and Provost throughout the year: that is, how to fight the cuts, how to minimize them through the bolstering of enrollments, how to meet the cuts when they come, and finally how to communicate with faculty about budget issues. The following topics or activities related to budget were included on Council agendas: a) What role the University faculty can play in influencing events in the state (i.e., the business community, the Governor, the legislature, and the State Board) to promote the improvement of funding for the University in particular, and the State System of Higher Education in general. To this end, the Council has met twice with the Vice President for University Relations, and once with two members of the State Board of Hi.Higher Education. There have been a number of meetings of selected Council members and other faculty with concerned business leaders of the state and local Eugene area. The potential for tying the economic development needs of the state to the research capabilities of the University has received much attention. b) Examining the serious underfunding of our library in comparison to the allocations received by other OSSHE units. c) Understanding the budget allocation systems used by the State Board's Office and their impact on the University. d) Protesting the legislative action that would have diluted the incentive for early retirements. e) Studying the allocation of indirect cost credits from grant incomes. f) Studying a proposed tuition reciprocity plan with the State of Washington. g) Reviewing the accelerated recruitment and retention efforts mounted by the Division of Student Affairs. h) Hearing reports on the current investigation of use of University land for such things as a "high tech park." i) Hearing reports on administrative computing needs across the state system and within the University. j) Suggesting that modifications be made in Faculty Enhancement Awards, a program which was initiated this year by the OSSHE State Board. k) Discussing the issue of faculty salaries during the Summer Session. 2. Council members served "ex officio" on five different committees: Academic Planning Advisory Committee University Budget Advisory Committee Ersted Award Committee Distinguished Service Award Committee Johnson Memorial Award Committee In addition, the Council formed and participated in a faculty panel to interview candidates for the position of Vice President for University Relations. The Council also appointed members of the Committee on Committees, members of the faculty to serve on hearing; panels in cases of dismissal "for cause," and faculty representatives to the Committee for Emeritus and Faculty Office Space,;Amazon Housing Policy Board, and Westmoreland Housing Policy Board. 3. The Council supported the report from the Task Force on Governance which was appointed and charged by last year's Council. As seems to happen with regularity at our institution, the Task Force's proposal was defeated and the governance structure of the University remains unchanged as of this writing. 4. The quality of undergraduate education has been a theme of concern for the Council over the past several years. This year was no exception. Issues of concern were: lack of overarching curricular review; lack of a system to coordinate schedules, requirements and expectations between and among departments; lack of information about the impact of the general requirements on students; and the rewards, or lack of them, for outstanding teaching and advising. Although the Council was not able to bring resolution to these concerns, it did initiate a program of freshmen seminars to strengthen the initial undergraduate experience. Fifty faculty have thus far volunteered to teach in this new program. 5. The Council reviewed and considered reports from the Committee on Peace Studies, the Affirmative Action Advisory Committee, the Task Force on Racial Harassment, the American Studies Program Committee, the R.O.T.C. Fact Finding Committee, and the Summer Humanities Institute. 6. A request was made and granted that all rule changes being considered by the OSSHE Board's Office or by the University administration be sent to the Council for review. 7. The proposed alternative to the current academic calendar was of considerable interest to the Council, and the appointment of a committee to study the issue further was welcomed. 8. The Council has asked that the question of faculty family members attending the University at reduced cost be explored by next year's Council. 9. The matter of tenure considerations in the appointments of instructors on an "ad hoc" basis was discussed and reviewed fully. 10. The matter of establishing a workload equalization policy was discussed and reviewed at length. 11. The lack of adherence to the new bicycle regulations was of continuing concern and still remains as an unresolved problem. 12. A faculty "conflict of interest" policy draft from the State Board's Office was critiqued. 13. The plan which created a new position of Vice President for Research was reviewed by the Council. 14. The Council hosted an Open House for all faculty at the invitation of the Board of Directors of the Faculty Club. 15. A Faculty College Bowl team was formed which, though narrowly losing to the student team, performed with distinction. The loss was attributed solely to slowing reflexes (that is, inability to push the buzzer fast enough).
Shirley J. Wilson, Chair; Office of Student Affairs Mike Ellis, Physical
Education Glen Love, English Mavis Mate, History John Moseley, Physics
Aaron Novick, Biology Barry Siegel, Economics Don Tull, Marketing
The Faculty Personnel Committee is charged with reviewing all academic
tenure and/or promotion cases in the university. It recommends on each
case considered to the Provost. The committee consists of eight faculty
members and two student members. The faculty members are elected by the
faculty for two year terms, four being elected each year. The student members
are appointed upon recommendation of the ASUO.
During 1983-84, the Faculty Personnel Committee was called upon to evaluate 40 cases, divided as follows:
Promotion to Associate Professor with Tenure 14 cases
Promotion to Associate Professor 1 case
Promotion to Professor with tenure 2 cases
Promotion to Professor 15 cases
Promotion to Senior Instructor with tenure 1 case
Tenure only 7 cases
The committee met 23 times, one more time than last year. It held its first meeting on November 15 and its last on May 24. In addition, in early December, the committee held a public meeting for the faculty in which criteria for promotion and tenure, preparation of files, and committee procedure were discussed. Comments received after the public meeting lead us to believe that the faculty found the meeting very useful. We therefore recommend that future personnel committees hold similar meetings. We further suggest such a gathering be held somewhat earlier than we did, perhaps in the first half of November.
We happily note that many of the problems of file preparation noted by previous committees did not seem to occur this year. We should like, however, to draw attention to several items of concern.
Respectfully submitted, Carl Carmichael, Speech Roger Chickering, History Tedrick Housh, Student Member Robert Hurwitz, Music Gloria Johnson, English Karin Keutzer, Student Member Robert Mazo, Chemistry (Chair) Richard Schmuck, Education Becky Sisley, Physical Education Joe Stone, Economics
JUNE 1984
571-21-071 To enforce timely completion of sanctions imposed under
this Code, a routine review of cases involving delinquency in compliance
is provided by the show-cause proceedings described below.
This proposal seeks to establish a program offering a major and
a minor in American Studies at the University of Oregon.
American Studies is a discipline that examines American culture, past and present, from a multitude of perspectives. It seeks to answer such questions as: What does it mean to be American? What is the nature of American character? -How much is American culture shaped by the American landscape? How has immigration affected the nature of American society? The discipline seeks to recognize the importance of all aspects of American life, to deal with American values in all their ramifications, and to discover the connections between them. In short, it is an effort to determine what is unique about American culture, and to discover how America has become what it is today.
American Studies has been a popular major at universities with national reputations ever since it began as its own discipline in the late 1940s. Ironically, the University of Oregon is one of the few major institutions in the United States with no American Studies program. The proposed program is an attempt to draw on the best examples at other institutions, and to bring the University of Oregon up to date and to redress the situation in which students at the University now can be seen as essentially penalized by not being given the educational and financial advantages of this major, both for enhancing their college experience and future careers.
While the University of Oregon does not have a program, and while it suffers budgetary problems, it does have the resources, in terms of faculty expertise and course offerings, for such a program. In addition, there is student, faculty, and administrative interest and enthusiasm to establish such a program. Several of Oregon's professors have served in prestigious positions as chair-holders of American Studies at universities in Europe, and are eager to help coordinate such a program here.
The proposed program is meant to allow for creative interdisciplinary work on the part of students and faculty alike, to provide as broad a picture as possible of American culture in all its complexity and diversity. The program integrates American history with American literature, art and music to give a sense of American experience, explores film to explain American culture, and draws on the social sciences to elucidate American economic and political affairs. An American Studies program would allow students to synthesize and broaden their understanding of their own culture, and thus enrich the way they function in American society. It would, as well, allow them the flexibility to devise programs of study tailored to their specific career interests. An American Studies program would also encourage faculty exchange of ideas, stimulate cooperative research efforts, and establish a climate of intellectual excitement.
The proposed program would pull together courses from relevant departments: History; English; Anthropology; Art History; Education; Folklore and Ethnic Studies; Geography; Landscape Architecture; Journalism; Law; Music; Political Science; Sociology; and Speech.
The Major: Students seeking to major in American Studies will be required to fulfill University requirements for a B.A. degree, including the language requirement. 45 credits will be necessary for the major. Students will be required to take a new three-course sequence developed for this program-- -
American Studies (AmSt) 101, 102, and 103. This sequence focuses on aspects of American culture considered chronologically and topically, spanning the 17th to the 20th centuries. Each of the 3 basic courses will be co-taught by 4 or 5 faculty members in different disciplines, one of whom will take responsibility for the administrative work of the course on a rotating basis. In addition, there will be occasional guest lectures. The 3 courses examine basic areas such as: the impact of war; value changes; perception of landscape; movement West; and ethnic and racial affairs. Students will then take 30 credits in the College of Arts and Sciences and Professional Schools in the 4 basic categories of: History; Literature; Arts; Social Sciences. 21 of those 30 credits must be upper division. Ten courses will be required; students will have to take 2 or 3 in each of the areas to bring the total to 10. In choosing the 10 courses, students will be required to take 2 sets of 3 courses that examine a given century, or a given organizing theme.
The proposed program is meant to allow for creative interdisciplinary work on the part of students and faculty alike, to provide as broad a picture as possible of American culture in all its complexity and diversity. The program integrates American history with American literature, art and music to give a sense of American experience, explores film to explain American culture, and draws on the social sciences to elucidate American economic and political affairs. An American Studies program would allow students to synthesize and broaden their understanding of their own culture, and thus enrich the way they function in American society. It would, as well, allow them the flexibility to devise programs of study tailored to their specific career interests. An American Studies program would also encourage faculty exchange of ideas, stimulate cooperative research efforts, and establish a climate of intellectual excitement.