UNIVERSITY PLANNING AND POLICY COUNCIL
April 18, 2005
Meeting Minutes
Present:
J. Bartow, R Baum, R. Geer, J. Hanifan, F. Hauser, F. Henderson, G. Kamberelis,
S.B. Kim, J. Langer, C. MacDonald, D. McCaffrey, J. Mumpower, K. Murray,
G. Paul, B. Spanier, S. Stern, J. Wick-Pelletier, E. Wulfert
Guests:
S. Chaiken, UAC Representative
R. Gibson, Registrar
S. Mahan, Associate Vice President for Enrollment Management
S. Phillips, Director of Academic Advisement
Minutes:
The minutes of April 4, 2005 were approved.
Discussion on Advisement:
Vice President for Enrollment Sheila Mahan explained that the Advisement Task Force was
created last spring when members of the Advisement Services Center brought a proposal to UAC
providing incoming freshmen AVNs prior to coming to orientation so that they could familiarize
themselves with the automated registration system prior to their advisement appointments. The
Advisement Services Center wanted to move to a situation in which students would not have to
learn the basic mechanics of the information systems on campus at the orientation so that more
time could be spent on substantive advisement. In the course of discussing that proposal, which
was postponed, it was discovered that there was a need for the establishment of an overall policy
toward advisement on campus that could affirm the importance of certain practices but that also
could accommodate the variety of procedures for advisement. Thus, a Task Force on
Advisement was created to craft such a policy. The Task Force submitted a draft policy with
recommendations to the UAC in December. The Task Force did not address the issue of course
availability which, while related to advisement, is an issue that largely stands apart from it.
Professor Chaiken reported that the Task Force continues to be constituted. One addition to the
policy is a provision intended to keep the Task Force continually constituted in some fashion to
assess ongoing issues in advisement. Early on, it became apparent that among faculty there is a
widespread lack of understanding of advisement along with the lack of a written policy. UAC
brought this bill to Senate on April 11th. Professor Chaiken further explained that as Executive
Committee members expected, the bill was immediately referred to UPC at Senate because of a
reference in the bill’s preamble to the resource implications of the policy.
Professor McCaffrey explained that because the preamble refers to need for additional resources,
the Senate asked for UPC to review it. UPC’s responsibility is to assess whether any proposed
allocation of resources implied by the policy would be consistent with the mission and priorities
of university. This led to discussion on the issue in which some members expressed the view
that UPC cannot make a recommendation since the Task Force report does not quantify resource
implications.
Interim Dean Mumpower suggested that the Senate should have an understanding of the specific
resource implications of a proposal before it passes legislation.
The Council then engaged in vigorous discussion on current advisement practices. Professor
MacDonald clarified that discussion on resources should be had before UPC votes. Interim
Provost Mumpower agreed that UAC could make a preliminary proposal or present several
options that can be discussed by administration. Administration will, in turn, have a better idea
of resource implications, and then bring the matter back to UPC. Vice President for Enrollment
Sheila Mahan noted that it will be business as usual if this is not acted on in Senate before the
end of the year.
Members of the Council then made several suggestions including—among others—that
advisement be done consistently across the campus, that the policy for mandatory advisement
each semester be changed in favor of a policy of advisement once each academic year, that the
Advisory Council established by the legislation be housed in governance rather than in the
Advisement Services Center, and that the document distinguish between technical advisement
and mentoring.
After a very lengthy discussion, Professor McCaffrey asked that UAC discuss the policy further
in light of the UPC’s comments and bring it back to UPC on May 2. Professor Chaiken did not
believe that the UAC would alter the basic approach of the legislation in such a short time given
that it already reflected such a long period of review and debate of the relevant issues. Vice
President of Enrollment Mahan noted that the UPC discussion raised a fundamental set of
concerns, and she could not imagine how the concerns can be addressed in two weeks.
A motion was made that UPC table the document at this time and ask that it comes back with a
specific proposal for advisement, including specific costs, so the Council members will know
what they are voting on.
Professor Chaiken excused himself from the room for the vote.
Discussion on the motion: Professor McCaffrey suggested that UAC can reflect on comments
made at this meeting and bring it back to UPC, and asked Council members how far in the future
UPC will table a recommendation. Dean Wick-Pelletier noted that the policy says advisement is
mandatory every semester and she has reservations about that. Professor Wulfert noted that
there have been so many issues discussed, a week or even longer this semester may not make a
difference and she suggested UPC provide specific feedback as to what should happen with the
policy. UAC can work on it over the summer and it should be ready to go in the fall.
VOTE: All in favor, the motion passed, and further discussion of the legislation is postponed
pending receipt of more specific information on the resource implication of the policy.
2
Proposed New School of Business Building and the Genomics Center Discussion: Professor
McCaffrey asked Council members to send any specific questions to him for forwarding to Dean
Leonard regarding the School of Business and Interim Vice President Videka regarding the
Genomics Center before next week’s meeting.
Fall 2005 Academic Calendar and DRAFT 2006/07 Academic Calendar:
Registrar Robert Gibson introduced both calendars. There were questions on the religious
holidays being listed on the 2006/07 calendar. Professor MacDonald clarified that the bill
recently passed by the Senate, to leave the religious holidays at the status-quo, meant up to the
2006/07 academic year. Registrar Gibson explained that it is good practice to have the calendar
established in advance for course scheduling.
A motion was made to approve the calendars, the motion passed unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
Jayne VanDenburgh
3
