The Senate Record - January 30, 2007

   

THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY

 

T H E   S E N A T E   R E C O R D

 

Volume 40 ----- January 30, 2007 ----- Number 4

 

The Senate Record is the official publication of the University Faculty Senate of The Pennsylvania State University, as provided for in Article I, Section 9 of the Standing Rules of the Senate, and contained in the Constitution, Bylaws, and Standing Rules of the University Faculty Senate, The Pennsylvania State University, 2006-2007.

 

The publication is issued by the Senate Office, 101 Kern Graduate Building, University Park, PA 16802 (telephone 814-863-0221). The Senate Record is distributed to all University Libraries and is posted on the Web at http://www.senate.psu.edu under “Publications.” Copies are made available to faculty and other University personnel on request.

 

Except for items specified in the applicable Standing Rules, decisions on the responsibility for inclusion of matters in the publication are those of the Chair of the University Faculty Senate.

 

When existing communication channels seem inappropriate, Senators are encouraged to submit brief letters relevant to the Senate's function as a legislative, advisory/consultative, and forensic body for possible inclusion in The Senate Record.

 

Reports that have appeared in the Agenda for the meeting are not included in The Senate Record unless they have been changed substantially during the meeting or are considered to be of major importance. Remarks and discussions are abbreviated in most instances. A complete transcript and tape of the meeting is on file. Individuals with questions may contact Dr. Susan C. Youtz, Executive Secretary, University Faculty Senate.

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

                                  I. Final Agenda for January 30, 2007                                                                   

          II.   Minutes and Summary of Remarks                                                                                                      

                             III.      Appendices                                                                                                            

                  A.  Attendance                                                                                                                             

                  B.  Undergraduate Education First-Year Seminar Door Handout         

 

 

FINAL AGENDA FOR JANUARY 30, 2007

                                                                                                              

             A. MINUTES OF THE PRECEDING MEETING                                                                                         

                    Minutes of the December 5, 2006, Meeting in The Senate Record 40:3

              [www.senate.psu.edu/record/index.html]

 

            B. COMMUNICATIONS TO THE SENATE                                                                     

                  Senate Curriculum Report of January 16, 2007                                                                

                  [www.senate.psu.edu/curriculum_resources/bluesheet/bluex.html]

 

            C. REPORT OF SENATE COUNCIL – Meeting of January 16, 2007                                  

 

            D. ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE CHAIR                                                                           

 

            E. COMMENTS BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNIVERSITY                                          

 

            F. FORENSIC BUSINESS                                                                                                    

 

            G. UNFINISHED BUSINESS                                                                                               

 

            SPECIAL INFORMATIONAL REPORT                                                                              

 

    A Test of Leadership:  Charting the Future of U.S. Higher Education

    Implications for Penn State and Higher Education

    Presentation by Executive Vice President and Provost Rodney A. Erickson                  

 

            H. LEGISLATIVE REPORTS

 

                 Committees and Rules

      Revision to the Constitution, Article II, Section 5 (c) (3) (Student Representation)                                                                                

                Revision of Senate Council, Standing Rules, Article II, Section 3               

 

                Revision of Senate Committee on Student Life, Standing Rules, Article II, Section 6 (m) 1 (iv) and(v)                                                              

 

               Revision of Senate Committee on Undergraduate Education, Standing Rules, Article II, Section 6 (n) 1 (iii)                                                                                       

                                                                                                                       

                   Undergraduate Education

                        First-Year Seminar                   
                                                                                   

I. ADVISORY/CONSULTATIVE REPORTS

 

       Faculty Affairs

 

            Revision of Policy HR-21 Definition of Academic Ranks (Report postponed until next Senate meeting March 20, 2007)

 

            Revision of Administrative Guidelines for HR-23: Promotion and Tenure Procedures and Regulations                                                 

 

J. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS

 

     Admissions, Records, Scheduling, and Student Aid

 

            Annual Report on the Reserved Spaces Program                                                          

 

     Computing and Information Systems

 

            Turnitin:  A Tool to Assess Student Plagiarism                                                  

           

     Elections Commission

 

            University Faculty Census Report for 2007-2008                                                         

 

     Faculty Benefits

 

            2007 Yearly Costs of Healthcare Plans                                                            

           

     Undergraduate Education

 

            Summary of Petitions by College, Campus, and Unit 2005-2006                                  

 

K. NEW LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS                                                                        

 

L. COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE GOOD OF THE UNIVERSITY                                                                                        

              

 

The University Faculty Senate

Tuesday, January 30, 2007, at 1:30 p.m.

 

The University Faculty Senate met on Tuesday, January 30, 2007, at 1:30 p.m. in room 112

Kern Graduate Building with Joanna Floros, Chair, presiding.

 

MINUTES OF THE PRECEDING MEETING

 

Chair Floros:  The December 5, 2006, Senate Record, providing a full transcription of the proceedings, was sent to all University Libraries and is posted on the Faculty Senate Web site.  Are there any corrections or additions to this document?

 

Seeing none, may I hear a motion to accept?

 

Senators:  So moved.

 

Chair Floros:   Second?

 

Senators:  Second.

 

Chair Floros:  All in favor of accepting the minutes of December 5, 2006, please say aye.

 

Senators:  Aye.

 

Chair Floros:  Opposed say nay.  Ayes have it, motion carried.  The minutes of the December 5, 2006, meeting have been approved.

 

COMMUNICATIONS TO THE SENATE

 

Senate Curriculum Report of January 16, 2007.  This document is posted on the University Faculty Senate Web site. 

 

Also included in the Communication to the Senate, Appendix A, is an update on the implementation of the Uniform Course Abbreviation legislation.  Page two of the appendix is a status sheet giving an overview of where we stand consolidating disciplinary abbreviations.  The Senate Committee on Curricular Affairs will accept proposals through spring 2007.

 

REPORT OF SENATE COUNCIL – Meeting of January 16, 2007

 

At the end of the Senate agenda are the minutes from the January 16 meeting of Senate Council.  Included in the minutes are topics that were discussed by the Faculty Advisory Committee to the President at the January 16 meeting.

                                                                                                                       

ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE CHAIR

 

Chair Floros:  Out of courtesy to our presenters, please turn off your cell phones and pagers at this time.  Thank you.

 

The Senate Officers will begin visits to University Park units on January 31, when we visit the Schreyer Honors College and the College of Health and Human Development.  We will be visiting the College of Communications on February 26; the College of the Liberal Arts and the Division of Undergraduate Studies on February 28; and the Eberly College of Science on March 1.  Please plan to attend these meetings.

 

I would like to encourage your support of the annual dance marathon taking place at the Bryce Jordan Center on February 16 through February 18.  The dance marathon is the largest student-run philanthropy in the world.  If you have never attended this event, you should try to pay a visit.

 

Nominations for Senate Officers and Special Committees are ongoing.  Contact Jamie Myers, Deidre Jago, or your Caucus Chair with your nominations.

 

The work group charged with examining academic issues associated with on-line courses and programs has submitted its final report.  The work group was co-chaired by Senate Chair-elect Dawn Blasko and ACUE Chair Dave Christiansen.  A meeting was held on January 23 to review the report with Provost Erickson, Vice President Pangborn, Associate Vice President Jeremy Cohen, and Susan Youtz.  At today’s Senate Committee meetings you all received copies of the final report.  The report will also be posted to the Senate Web site.  The Officers and I will be asking Senate Committees to discuss the report at the next Senate meeting and provide feedback to us on next steps.  I also believe ACUE will be having similar discussions.

 

    There is a correction regarding a recent Senate Legislation.  On January 24, 2007, an advertisement in the Daily Collegian, Know your Rights, claim that as a result of the Pennsylvania Academic Freedom hearings the Faculty Senate at Penn State adopted a new policy that grants students at Penn State academic freedom rights for the first time, this is inaccurate.  On April 2006 the Faculty Senate numbered its Policy 20-00 and updated the long standing guidelines for resolving classroom problems that students followed, since the 1970’s to better connect all the related grievance policies.  The Faculty Senate has a long history of supporting the academic freedom of students and faculty.

                                                                                                   

COMMENTS BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNIVERSITY

 

Chair Floros:  At this time I would like to invite President Spanier to come forward to make some remarks.

 

President Spanier:  Thank you very much.  Because of the Senate agenda today, time does not permit a long magic show.  There is a wonderful magic show that is taking place at 7:30 p.m. tonight at the new State Theatre downtown.  I am going to be the warm-up act for a fabulous show by two recent Penn State graduates; who have been on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno, and were also in the Penn State Performing Magicians when they were here. 

 

I want to mention to all of you that Penn State will soon be going through its NCAA Certification process.  This is where a team of people review Intercollegiate Athletics.

Many of you here are involved in that process.  Jeremy Cohen is over-seeing that process for the University and if any of you have any questions please feel free to contact him. We have a wonderful team of people working on this project. 

 

Next Tuesday is the day the Governor will announce his budget recommendations for Penn State.  We have not been told what his recommendation for us will be, which gives me the impression that it will probably be nothing. He would have told me to brace myself if it is going to be really bad. It probably will not be a big number or he would have said that I will be very excited about this budget. Being he said nothing about it gives me the impression that it will be very modest increase.  We will have our opportunity to make our case in a public forum on February 27 when we have our House and Senate Appropriations Committee meetings.  They will both be in a panel discussion format so we will be sharing the time with the leaders of other state-related universities.

 

Applications continue to roll into Penn State. At this moment we are at about 5,500 applications ahead of this time last year. We have been very conservative this year in sending out acceptances. We are sending them out slower and fewer, and in a more measurable way in order to get our enrollments into the zone that we would like them to be.  We think we will be closer next year to the target that we would normally like to have. 

 

We are in the process of searching for three Deans and one of those has now been completed.  We are very pleased to say that we have hired a fabulous person to come to Penn State to be the Dean of the College of Arts and Architecture that has just been announced in the last few days.  Barbara Korner is coming to us from the University of Florida and she was our top choice.  We are extremely excited to have her here at Penn State; she is a great catch for us. We have a finalist coming in for the Dean of the College of Health and Human Development; this will be his second visit.  We have the possibility of that search concluding soon.  The next search will be the Dean for the College of Earth and Mineral Sciences where I am told that we have an outstanding group of semi-finalists, which will be narrowed down to a group of finalists who will then be brought to Penn State for interviews.

 

Last night at the U.S. Congress, Democratic leaders proposed some new measures that will affect higher education in a very positive way.  They are proposing a six percent increase in the Pell Grant which will be the largest increase that we have had in some time. That will be some very welcomed news because the Pell Grant is the Federal Grant that goes to the neediest students and our students have significant needs for student-aid. If this can make it through the process it will be very welcomed.  There is a proposal for new dollars that would improve funding for the physical sciences and biomedical research. That will also be welcomed news for Penn State. On the other hand, they are promising the end of earmarks, and that sounds like a very reasonable and popular thing. Penn State does receive earmarks and the kinds we receive are not the kind you normally hear about.  We do not get earmarks that are not a fundamental part of our program in areas like defense, transportation, and agriculture that we really do need to carry out our programs and the U.S. government expects us to receive to carry out our programs. They are promising return for these other investments in higher education that there will be no earmarks and we will have to monitor this.

 

I am very please to have seen on the way in, a door handout about two different recommendations that will be discussed and coming before you today concerning FYS.  I had mentioned my concern about this last time. There are two alternatives proposed and I’m very pleased to see that you are taking this up and will have some options.  If I understand what the two communicate I personally am attracted to Substitute Recommendation 2, but we will see what the rest of you think. 

 

Finally, let me reiterate what Yana mentioned about the dance marathon. There was a fantastic dinner last night at the Penn Stater getting ready for this event.  This is the most remarkable thing that you could ever imagine.  It is the largest student-run philanthropy in the United States and there is nothing like it anywhere in the country. We raise more money here at Penn State than all the other dance marathons in the country put together.  Our students have been out there raising money and working hard on this.  If you are a faculty or staff member on this campus, I can’t imagine what reason you would have for not stopping by the Bryce Jordan Center that Friday afternoon through Sunday afternoon, and even if you are at another campus it will be worth the trip. If you can’t come, just send money.  Everyone should be contributing a few dollars and we wish all the students involved in Thon, great success. I will be happy to answer your questions.

 

Chair Floros:  Are there any questions for President Spanier?  Please stand and wait for the microphone before you give your name and unit.

 

Michael Chorney, College of Medicine:  I would like to follow-up on something that I brought forth a number of months ago about off campus housing.  I noticed in the Collegian a proposed 250 student apartment complex that may have been turned down by the Borough Council.  In the future as we might be expanding, how do you view our interaction with the town and the concept of a town around a college or a college around a town in terms of developing or expanding housing that is available for students who do not get housing contracts?   Would you like to comment?

 

President Spanier:  I think right now, on this campus, we are probably at our peak enrollment and everyone has a place to live. We would expect to begin to see the demand for student housing decrease slightly and every year there is more student housing being built. This gives students more options, and the more housing being built leads to more number of vacancies, which we hope will keep the cost of housing down.  There is plenty of student housing and more are being built, all of our students have a place to live, so I don’t think there will be a housing crunch going forward.   I don’t think the Borough’s action on that particular property was unreasonable because they are concerned about the density of housing, and the character of the downtown area in the Borough, the idea of taking something that now has a certain density and turning it into a huge apartment complex.  The Borough is encouraging additional housing downtown that would bring professionals, faculty, staff, and others who are going to live there on a long-term basis. We talk to the Borough Council all the time and the lines of communication are wide open. I think they know what we are up to, and I think the directions are about right.

 

Chair Floros:  Any other questions for President Spanier?  Please stand and wait for the microphone before you give your name and unit.

 

Edward Bittner, University College, Penn State Greater Allegheny:  I would like to thank you on behalf of the campus for your work in getting a name change.  Thank you.

 

President Spanier:  No more name changes this year, please.

 

Chair Floros:  Any other questions for President Spanier?  I don’t see any.

 

President Spanier: Thank you very much

 

Chair Floros:  As we begin our discussion of reports, I remind you to please stand, wait for a microphone, and identify yourself and the unit you represent before addressing the Senate.

 

FORENSIC BUSINESS

NONE

 

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

NONE

 

SPECIAL INFORMATIONAL REPORT

 

              A Test of Leadership: Charting the Future of U.S. Higher Education Implications for Penn State and Higher Education, Appendix C.

Executive Vice President and Provost Rodney Erickson presented this report.

 

Chair Floros: I invited Provost Erickson to make a presentation on the final report from the Commission on the Future of Higher Education (also known as the Spellings Commission report).  Dr. Erickson gave a similar report to the Board of Trustees in November.  The final report covers such topics as the value of higher education, student access to college, cost and affordability, and financial and institutional accountability.

 

Provost Erickson will also answer any questions you have on the budget and planning report from the October agenda.

 

Provost Erickson:  Good afternoon everyone.  I want to thank our Chair for providing me with the opportunity to present some brief comments about the report, A Test of Leadership: Charting the Future of U.S. Higher Education.  How many of you have read the Spellings Commission Report?  If you haven’t, it is about 30 pages of text, it has large print and it won’t take you long to read.  This report, perhaps more than any report in the past has received more traction and has been the subject of more debate than any other report on the status of Higher Education.  There were 19 members of the Commission including five either retired or current Presidents or Chancellors at Universities in addition to various other business and Governmental leaders.  The Commission’s report is really a mixed message, many laudatory comments about the state of higher education in the U.S. and concerns about the deficiencies in the current performance.  The report cites that the growing competitive threat from other nations in which student achievement is out-pacing that of American students.  The Commission warns of unwarranted complacency in American higher education, expressing concerns about college graduates lacking basic skills and the lack of information about the cost and quality of post-secondary institutions.  There is certainly much to commend this report, but it also rises just as many issues as it addresses and I think for that reason, David Ward the President of the American Council of Education and former Chancellor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison chose not to sign on with the rest of the committee in endorsing the report.  The report focuses mainly on what has come to be known as the three A’s: access, affordability and accountability in higher education. 

  

  The slide presentation is posted on the Senate Web site at:     http://www.senate.psu.edu/agenda/2006-2007/jan30-07agn/appb.pdf.

 

 

LEGISLATIVE REPORTS

 

We have four Legislative reports from the Senate Committee on Committees and Rules.  The first report appears on today’s agenda as Appendix C, entitled Revision to the Constitution, Article II,  Section 5 (c) (3) (Student Representation).  Since this report proposes an amendment to the Constitution, it appeared in the December agenda and has been tabled until today.  Committee Chair Deidre Jago will respond to questions.

 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES AND RULES

Revision to the Constitution, Article II, Section 5 (c) (3) (Student Representation)

Deidre E. Jago, Chair

 

Deidre Jago, University College, Hazleton:  Are there any questions?

 

Chair Floros:  This report has been brought to the floor by the committee and needs no second.  Are we ready to vote?  All those in favor of this report, please say aye.

 

Senators:  Aye.

 

Chair Floros:  Opposed nay.  The ayes have it.  The motion passes.  This report will be sent to the President for his approval.  Thank you, Deidre.  The next report appears on today’s agenda as Appendix D, entitled Revision of Senate Council, Standing Rules, Article II, Section 3.  Chair Jago will present this report.

 

 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES AND RULES

Revision of Senate Council, Standing Rules, Article II, Section 3

Deidre E. Jago, Committee Chair

 

Deidre Jago:  This report is a little bit different.  First of all I would like to thank Jean Landa Pytel for her hard work in putting this together and I think it explains what we are trying to do. It is a way to try to equalize the length of terms that people can serve and six years is what we are suggesting for Senate Council.  Are there any questions?

 

Dennis Gouran, College of the Liberal Arts: If this passes when does the clock start ticking? That could have some implications for who gets elected to represent their voting units in Senate Council next year at least in some voting units.

 

Deidre Jago:  It would be implemented in 2008-2009.

 

Dennis Gouran:  If someone had six years now and this passes, does this mean that this person can go six more years because that is the effective operational date or that it is retro-active and six years up to that point indicates the person shouldn’t stand for election.

 

Deidre Jago:  We have not talked about that particular part of it.

 

Dennis Gouran:  Well it seems to me that the clock starts ticking when it’s passed and you ignore previous years of service in that capacity, but that should be clear.

 

Deidre Jago:  It doesn’t affect a lot of people and what we are trying to do is look at the Senate Constitution to find out in terms of representation on different committees. We have limits on how long a person can serve on a given committee, how long they can serve as Chair. The committee thought by limiting the Senate Council term to six consecutive years, then it would give a greater impact for individuals who have been on Senate Council to serve in other capacities, perhaps with leadership positions.

 

Dennis Gouran:  I understand what the legislation does, but that does not answer my question of when the clock starts ticking, and that should be made clear, so let me go on to the comment.   When one looks at the Constitution Bylaws and Standing Rules, it comes across at least to me that Senate Council is a different kind of animal, in which it is not another standing committee.  The functions and rules of the standing committees are particular and operate within limited domain, and Senate Council has a much broader mandate and cuts across domains of activity, so to treat it as if it were another standing committee seems to be inappropriate.  It is the one body to which voting units have the right to send whom they wish, and if they wish to send someone for more than six consecutive years that right should be honored.

 

Deidre Jago:  We did consider that, and if the body of the Senate feels that there should not be a term limit of six consecutive years for Senate Council they should vote against this legislation.

 

Chair Floros:  Deidre, do you want to make a friendly amendment to the first question about having the clock ticking from the time that this is going to be put into effect.

 

Deidre Jago:  Should we take it back to committee and then bring it back next month?

 

Jean Landa Pytel, College of Engineering:  My suggestion is that if this passes the question is how it will affect Senate Council members currently on Council and if they are going to be grandfathered and the clock will start ticking now, or will they not be grandfathered.  I think perhaps we could take this back to Committee on Committees and Rules and discuss.

 

Chair Floros:  To talk about implementation in the future and if it passes we can come back with further clarification.

 

Donald Rung, Retired Senator:  When you say no more than six consecutive years, could you serve five, then get off a year and then come back and serve five more?

 

Deidre Jago:  Yes, one year off and then come back on if your unit decides to elect you.

 

Donald Rung:  So what is the point of the legislation if I can do that?   

 

Deidre Jago:  It is that way with any of the other committees.  You can be on Curricular Affairs for five years, go off and then come back on.  It was a way to add consistency.

 

Brian Tormey, Altoona:  I would like to vote against this recommendation because I think there is value in having experienced leadership at the Senate’s highest levels.  I have been on and off Senate Council and other committees, but I do see a benefit to the University having people serve on Council that has served at length.  The Council tends to take on a different role that it should have according to the Bylaws and Constitution, one that gives representation across the University and in fact provides for a strong representation from all quarters.  I think that is a very important characteristic that needs to be preserved and I think that is what the original intenders of the legislation that set the Council in its present form had in mind when they set it up that way.  I think this present legislation that is before us is a bit short-sighted in the fact that you can go off the Council and then come back.  I don’t see the purpose of it all as being a very valid or appropriate legislation to recommend support for.

 

Jean Landa Pytel:  The reason the Committee on Committees and Rules voted for this is because the nature of Senate Council is a little different; it is a leadership type of a group and therefore leadership should be perhaps encouraged to be shared.  I have been on Senate Council myself and there are people on Senate Council who are contributing and who have been there for eons. The leadership or the knowledge that is gained by sitting on Senate Council should be shared among Committees as well, where the work of the Senate is being done.  This is a way of encouraging people who have served on Senate Council to get out and get some grass-root experience, and create policies, reports that come to Senate Council for a vote. We would like to encourage people who do get on Senate Council to have that kind of experience, and if you have had that experience to share that, go back to the Committees and guide them.  As far as being on for five years and then off one and back on again forces an individual to get other experience even it is for a year and heaven knows they might like it.

 

Chair Jago:  And usually when we assign a Committee responsibility to an individual Senator we try to have that person on a Committee for at least two years.  It shows less stagnation if we have people who have a variety of experiences on the Senate.

 

Robert Zambanini, Berks:  A motion to send a resolution back to Committee supersedes the motion to vote, if so I would like to make a motion that we send this back to Committee pending the re-writing to include when the term limit begins.

 

Chair Floros:  Is there a second for the motion?  The Parliamentarian instructed that the debate is now over.  The floor is now open for debate whether we should send it back to the Committee. Is there any discussion?  No comments and no discussion.  We are going to take a vote and if the vote is yes we send the report back to the Committee, and if the vote is no, then we will go back to the original report.  Those in favor of sending the report back to the Committee say aye.

 

Senators:  Aye.

 

Chair Floros:  Opposed say Nay.

 

Senators:  Nay.

 

Chair Floros:  I think the Nays have it, but we have to get a count.  The Ayes please raise one hand.

 

Deidre Jago:  And it is my understanding it would be to establish a date on which the clock would start.

 

Chair Floros:  The Nays please raise one hand.

 

Chair Floros:  The Nays have it and now we are back to the original report.

 

Deidre Jago:  We can ask CC&R when they would like to start the clock, if it starts in the next year or if we look at individuals who have already been there.  Jamie, do you have a question?

 

Jamie Myers, College of Education:  I serve on Committee on Committee and Rules and the vote to bring this to the floor was divided, and it passed by a narrow margin and that is why it is here today.  I would like to urge defeat of this recommendation for reasons that have already been stated and I believe it is the units prerogative to send who they wish to Council.

 

Tramble Turner, Abington:  Did the Committee on Committee and Rules receive any information if particular units found it difficult to get more than one person to stand for election?

 

Deidre Jago:  We did not ask whether it was difficult to find people to run, we were looking at the trend and most of the time the person is on Senate Council for about four to five years, and then they go off.

 

Rose Martin, College of Health and Human Development:  What percent of people will this impact?

 

Deidre Jago:  One or two individuals, it went back about ten years and it is a very limited number of people.                                                                                               

 

Chair Floros:  Are there any other questions?

 

Michael Chorney, College of Medicine:  How did the Committee arrive at this six-year term limit?

 

Deidre Jago:  Consistency with the other term limits on Committees.

 

Michael Chorney:  I am the Counselor for the Penn State College of Medicine; this is my third or fourth year and I am just starting to get the hang of what to say, when to say it, and what this is all about.  I think that somewhere in this document there is some sort of power thing going on and those counselors who have been there greater than six years wringing their hands as they basically behind the scenes direct the Senate activities.  I think that is all wrong; they are put forth by their unit based on their service, their interests, and their contributions to deciding what goes onto the floor.  I have a great relationship with my 21 Senators and graduate student and they would gladly put me forward, but I think it should be up to the units.  Thank you.

 

Deidre Jago:  We have had the same kind of discussion in Committee as Jamie said a few moments ago.  It was a very close vote as to whether or not it should go forward but we thought this should be something to present to the full Senate for discussion.

 

Chair Floros:  This report has been brought to the floor by Committee and needs no second.  Are we ready to vote?  All those in favor of this report please say aye.

 

Senators:  Aye.

 

Chair Floros:  Opposed say Nay.  We will have to count again, will you please stand up if you are in favor of the motion. 

 

Chair Floros:  The Nays have it and the motion does not pass. Thank you, Deidre.  The next report appears on today’s agenda as Appendix E, entitled Revision to Senate Committee on Student Life, Standing Rules, Article II, Section 6 (m) 1 (iv) and (v).  Chair Jago will present this report.

 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES AND RULES

Revision to Senate Committee on Student Life, Standing Rules,

Article II, Section 6 (m) 1 (iv) and (v)

Deidre E. Jago, Committee Chair

 

Deidre Jago:  Are there any questions about this report?  It involves a change in the membership for the Committee on Student Life.                                                                  

 

Chair Floros:  This report has been brought to the floor by Committee and needs no second.  Are we ready to vote?  All those in favor of this report please say aye.

 

Senators:  Aye.

 

Chair Floros:  Opposed nay.  The ayes have it.  The motion passes.  The Senate has approved this Legislative Report.  The last report from CC&R appears on today’s agenda as Appendix F, entitled Revision of Senate Committee on Undergraduate Education, Standing Rules, Article II, Section 6 (n) 1 (iii).  Chair Jago will present this report.

 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES AND RULES

Revision of Senate Committee on Undergraduate Education, Standing Rules

Article II, Section 6 (n) 1 (iii)

Deidre E Jago, Chair

 

Deidre Jago:  Are there any questions?  This is very similar to the last report, change in the Committee membership on Undergraduate Education.

 

Chair Floros:  This report has been brought to the floor by Committee and needs no second.  Are we ready to vote?  All those in favor of this report please say aye.

 

Senators:  Aye.

 

Chair Floros:  Opposed nay.  The ayes have it.  The motion passes. The Senate has approved this Legislative Report.  Thank you, Deidre. 

 

We have a few more reports that probably will have a little more discussion than what has been preceded, and please note that I am wearing an olive branch.  This was made by an artist in commemoration of the 2004 Olympics which took place in Athens, Greece for me to wear at special times like this one.  We have a legislative report from the Senate Committee on Undergraduate Education and it appears on today’s agenda as Appendix G, entitled First-Year Seminar.  Committee Chair Greg Ziegler will introduce this report and respond to questions.

 

 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION

First-Year Seminar, Appendix G

Gregory Ziegler, Chair

 

Gregory Ziegler, College of Agricultural Sciences:  I greatly admire President Spanier’s ability to get up here and defuse the tension in the room with a magic trick, but I have no such abilities.  The Undergraduate Education Committee recognizes that the future of First-Year Seminar is divisive.  However, what we would like to do today is focus on the points

 that we agree on.  <