Absent: F. Chadwell, H. Chereck, K. Nicholson, M. Partch, M. Smith, J. Wade

The minutes of the October 21 meeting were approved as submitted.

J. Earl noted that he supported the motion, and was surprised to see how quickly it was brought to the Undergraduate Council. He also noted that the problem could be solved by just contacting the chairs of the departments concerned (Music, Linguistics, Physics) and asking them to either make them 4-credit courses, or remove them from the list of group satisfying courses. R. Zimmerman indicated that Physics has solved the problem and will modify the courses involved.

J. Nicols explained that he is against the motion because of the lower division courses that do not meet the 4-hour contact requirement. He indicated there are some departments that have increased the number of credits offered from 3 to 4 but have not increased the contact hours or workload for the students. J. Earl explained that this motion would only involve the courses satisfying group requirements. Another point raised by J. Rice was the large number of courses that satisfy the group requirements. Do we want to keep these courses in that classification, or just leave them as 3-credit courses that do not satisfy the requirement?

J. Nicols indicated that he does not know how to deal with this situation and asked the Council's help. He noted that some departments will make claims to justify the additional credit hour, but may not police themselves. Another concern is routinely granting courses to satisfy general education requirements and having a very large list of group satisfying courses. After more discussion, a vote was taken.

The motion passed and it will be sent to the Senate.

W. Gottshall brought these motions to the UC as chair of the SRC:

(1) If a student is failing due to lack of performance, an endorsement from the major department should be required to allow the student to continue as a major.

(2) Major departmental advising should be available during the summer months for those students who are seeking reinstatement.

Discussion of (1): It was decided that this item should not be a motion, but instead a recommendation endorsed by the UC. Currently, students seeking reinstatement must fill out a form from Academic Advising. The UC felt that the form should have a box to be checked if the student needs an endorsement from the department to be reinstated and then an area for that endorsement. This should be required for students who have a low GPA in their major, but not for those students who had personal problems and had to stop out.

Discussion of (2): On the matter of summer advising, it was noted that there are designated times for advising during the summer; for example, IntroDUCKtion. It was suggested that the office managers in the various departments be made aware of the advising times so that they can inform students.

1) Revision of General Education Requirements
• ramifications involving resources
• more ideas needed instead of more money
• what is appropriate for a 4-credit course
• how many courses should be offered as group satisfying
• coherence in the program
• legitimate transformation from 3 to 4 credits
• structure of courses

David Hubin (President's Office and UO liaison to the accreditation team) has been asked to attend the next UC meeting regarding what has been done and what needs to be done to comply with the accreditation committee's recommendations.