Leonardo Garcia-Pabon attended the meeting in support of the Minor in Latin American Studies and to answer any questions on the proposal. It was noted that this minor does not require new resources and a faculty member on staff will be the coordinator. It was also noted that number of credit hours to complete the minor is 28, and not 48 as indicated on the first page of the proposal. (Garcia-Pabon) will submit a new first page correcting the number of credits.)

Concerns of the UC:

• Degree clearance -- done by advisor

• Portuguese -- not offered by UO; some faculty know the language and can test the students for proficiency; do not have resources to offer Portuguese at this time; do not have a Portuguese collection in the Library

• Number of students per year -- from 50-100; can accommodate up to 100

After Garcia-Pabon left, the UC voted as follows:

In favor: all voting participants

Opposed: none

The proposal passed unanimously.

The UC reviewed the synopsis of the meeting held on Monday, December 13, between John Nicols, Herb Chereck, Jim Long, Joe Stone, and Bob O'Brien regarding definitions of Majors, Minors and Certificates. Outcomes of the UC discussion:

• certificate is principally interdepartment and multidiscipline

• minors are usually central to one department

• certificate is broader; minor is more narrowly defined

• students have to apply for a certificate, but not in a minor

• certificates are almost the equivalent to the minimum credits for some majors

There was discussion as to the level of credits required for each (use of 400 level as opposed to upper division), the number of credits required for each, and whether these definitions should be included in the catalog. H. Chereck indicated that he has never seen a catalog with definitions for each, and was opposed to definitions becoming part of the catalog copy.

J. Rice indicated that according to these guidelines, certificates require the same amount of credits as some majors. Is this appropriate? He also indicated that in some cultures, a certificate in a certain subject is very important.

H. Chereck indicated that the purpose of the definitions was to give departments somewhere to start when developing new majors, minors, or certificates. These definitions would be a point of reference. Another item raised was that of the certificate being interdisciplinary. If a certificate given now is not interdisciplinary, would it be disqualified according to these guidelines?

It was decided that J. Long will get information on certificates now being offered and e-mail the pages of the catalog referring to these certificates to the members. The subject will be held over to the next meeting for further discussion.

J. Earl indicated that this is long overdue. Film Studies is a powerful subunit and has its own program and its own students and are now asking for official status to offer a certificate. S.Ponder indicated that Journalism was consulted and they are in favor of this formal recognition.

There was discussion about this certificate requiring 32 credits, and the general guidelines discussed to have the requirement at 36 credits. In addition, is the Library able to accommodate this program with the equipment and resources (videos and films) needed? F. Chadwell indicated that she does the selection of videos and films for this program and that faculty can check them out but students are required to view them in the building. The Library tries to purchase DVD when they can as these can be played on a computer. But, she also indicated that this will place a large burden on the Library, even though they support this program.

J. Rice noted that there will be a new classroom in Grayson Hall equipped with the latest sound system and AV system devoted to Film Studies. There will also be a 200-seat classroom in Gilbert Hall which will have some capabilities for the program.

H. Chereck was concerned about the costs. Current costs are now absorbed by the department; but with the growth of the program and additional requests and replacement of materials, how will these costs be covered? J. Earl commented that this is a solid program and it should be approved, and the matters of additional costs can be worked out in the future. Another item brought up by S.Pratt was that this will be a limited-admission program and students will be admitted on a first come-first served basis. Thus, the students will feel out of control when choosing their classes.

It was decided that the UC would not yet vote on this pending answers to their concerns. F.Chadwell will contact Julia Lesage (English Dept.) regarding resources, and a representative of the program will be asked to attend the next meeting of the UC for discussion of the proposal.

J. Long met with Wylie Chen (President of the ASUO) and gave him a copy of the earlier minutes of the UEPCC. Long indicated that Chen said the Linguistics Dept. is willing to sponsor this proposal as the proposal should not be submitted by students. Long also informed Chen that a second proposal had already been discussed and was not approved. Chen indicated he would go through Linguistics to have them submit a formal proposal.

Long discussed a letter he received from the Graduate Council asking for two representatives from the UC to participate in program reviews. Reviews are scheduled for April and May. This is the first time the UC has been asked to participate. The Graduate School has been conducting these reviews, even though most of them are for undergraduate programs. A.Leavitt indicated discussion that there was too much administration involvement in the process and not enough faculty involvement. Since there were no volunteers, Long indicated he would ask the "Dan Pope replacement" (Pope is now on sabbatical) to participate. Long will ask Gwen Steigelman to make an appointment for the remainder of Pope's term (through Spring).

Meeting adjourned at 1:35 PM