Eastern Mennonite University
Undergraduate Council
October 8, 2007
#3
CC301/302

Present: Marie Morris, Kim Brenneman, Spencer Cowles, Vi Dutcher, Cathy Smeltzer Erb, Joan Griffing, Cyndi Gusler, Doug Graber Neufeld, Cyndi Gusler, Nancy Heisey, Elroy Miller, Patrick Reynolds, Gloria Rhodes, Deirdre Smeltzer, Mary Sprunger, Arlene Wiens, Lester Zook

Student Reps: Sarah Roth, Lindsey Grosh
Absent: Beth Aracena

1. Vi Dutcher shared that her studies have revealed that the Lord’s Prayer is a good prayer for the morning. She shared a prayer lifting the concerns that were shared earlier and everyone joined her in the Lord’s Prayer.

2. Minutes from the Sept. 17 meeting were included in the agenda. No changes were recommended and the minutes were approved as recorded.

3. Undergraduate FTE Implementation Plan

Marie distributed a new UG FTE table that incorporates department load changes since 05-06, the departmental prioritization reduction goal of 2.49 FTE, what remains of the departmental prioritization goals, additional “non-prioritization” cuts that have been made, and tentative cuts recommended in the Implementation Plan towards the 9 UG FTE. The revised UG FTE table makes clear that the total prioritization impact on undergraduate FTE is 11.49; that is, 2.49 FTE from specific departmental prioritization recommendations and the additional 9 FTE for prioritization recommendation #89.
A council member stated that he feels there has been a “disconnect” in our work between FTE cuts and enrollment, and is concerned what that will mean if this spring, like last spring, our enrollment drops.
The consensus from the departments was that it is not possible to trim more from existing programs; the next step will be to cut programs. Do we want to do this ourselves, or leave it to the administration and Board of Trustees? The Undergraduate Unit is still far from the goal of reductions set by prioritization.

Review of Summary Responses

• It was noted that the language in the rationale statement for retaining the 12 SH for French was not clear with regard to the French major and minor. Council was asked to address the question of what to do with the French major/minor. The Language and Literature department has said, it will not fight to keep the French major/minor, but would like to retain hours toward a Professional Certificate. In order to offer the certificate, 15 SH hrs of upper level courses need to be offered. Vi shared that a number of Congolese students from Northern Virginia are interested in such certification for their various professions and that Chantal Logan has advised approximately 18 independent studies. It was suggested that perhaps the Adult Degree Completion Program may be a better method of providing such a program. A question was raised as to the impact on the GVC foreign language requirement if we drop the French major/minor. It seems the cross cultural component of our curriculum, which is core to EMU’s mission, would need a strong foreign language program. A distinction needs to be made as to the goal of the foreign language requirement. Is the requirement one of language competency or is it more for exposure and cross-cultural learning. It was suggested that the foreign language requirement is more for learning about other cultures and that “competency” is an unrealistic expectation for what is currently a 6 SH requirement. It was noted that the undergraduate unit, and EMU, is clarifying its identity, so it is not a good idea to cut things that contribute to that identity even if enrollment numbers are low. Earlier a suggestion was made to collaborate with Fairfield Technologies to solve this foreign language dilemma. This may not work, as in that setting, often times the cultural component of language is removed, therefore, our students would not get the greatest benefit. Dean Morris stated that when we are clear about our purpose/vision/goal then this can guide our decision making, as in this case with the foreign language question.

Motion : That we recommend discontinuation of the French major/minor but retain 12 semester hours for foreign language study. We further recommend that GVC encourage the continuation of a foreign language requirement as it helps to achieve the stated mission of “educating students to live in a global context. “

Approved by consensus.

• Can those departments that have made few cuts, make more cuts? It was noted that those departments with the fewest cuts received high ratings in prioritization.
• Double loading – Marie noted there is very little of this happening. It is currently happening in the history department, only because they collapsed other courses to retain this loading. FTE hours were NOT added. The only other area where double loading is happening is with the GVC Senior Seminar and this course is currently under review for possible elimination.
• Speech requirement

The Language and Literature department’s position is to retain it as a 2 SH course, and build it to a 3SH upper level course. Is it possible to have fewer sections and have each program decide if their majors need the course; possibly having the course geared toward the department’s needs? By shifting the requirement on the department shoulders, students may feel better about taking the course. It was noted that for today’s environment students need to be able to incorporate technology into speeches. Therefore, it was suggested that perhaps the Visual & Communication Arts department would be a better location for this offering. Council members advised that the VACA faculty and GVCC develop a process to gather feedback from departments regarding their perceived needs in oral communication and perhaps draft a proposal for faculty review. It was noted that once this revision is made it may result in further semester hour/FTE reductions. For the Implementation Plan we could include 0 FTE for the “Low” column and perhaps 0.25 FTE for the “High” column.

Motion : That we move speech to VACA and ask their faculty to work with GVCC to process and strengthen the course. This should include a survey of all departments for feedback.

Approved, with one opposition.

• Combine FYS and college writing

Marie reported that Vi and GVCC are working together on this and are positive on how it will work. Nancy added that potential additional cuts to GVCC exist if classes are a little larger.

• New faculty mentoring release time

This program has 15 SH of release time for new faculty. A senior faculty member serves as coordinator. New faculty members see value in this, and it does make EMU attractive to prospective professors. Some new faculty members have shared that sabbaticals are more valued than new faculty release time. As mentors, senior faculty find it burdensome, particularly if they do not receive any compensation.

Motion: That we shift the coordinator role to an administrative duty and offer up the 15 SH to the Implementation Plan.

Approved. It was suggested that perhaps faculty senate may want to identify a role in mentoring/supporting new faculty.

• Associate Provost – Due to the lack of time, this issue was not discussed, however, several faculty voiced that it is a topic that warrants discussion.

Because Undergraduate Council wishes to make further progress on the Implementation Plan before forwarding it to Academic Cabinet and President’s Cabinet it was suggested that we request that Faculty Assembly for next Monday be exchanged for Undergraduate Council. Pending this approval Undergraduate Council will meet again next Monday, Oct 15 at 10 am.

Recorder,
Cheryl Doss