University at Albany, State University of New York
Governance Council
R. Michael Range, Chair
October 27, 2008
Minutes
Present: Nan Carroll, Richard Collier, Edward Cupoli, Virginia Eubanks, Nicholas Fahrenkopf,
John Monfasani, R. Michael Range, John Schmidt
The meeting convened at 3:33.
Agenda topics:
Minutes:
The Minutes of October 13, 2008 were approved with minor changes.
New Business:
Recommendations for Members of the Honor College Governance Board:
The names of current and continuing members of the board were reviewed. There was discussion
about additional faculty that could be considered. Five new board members need to be
recommended that would serve in staggered terms. The list of eligible faculty submitted by Jeffrey
Haugaard was reviewed and, even though the listing was not complete, council members
recommended a total of 7 faculty to allow for some flexibility: 4 from CAS, and 3 from other
schools (SED, CNSE, SSW). It was suggested that 3 three-year appointments be made from the
CAS members and 2 two-year appointments from the other group. The rationale was that this
would build strength where there are the most students. A motion was made to accept the
recommendations. It was seconded and approved unanimously.
Proposed GAC Charter Amendment:
The Chair provided background regarding a proposal made last year for a program that did not
originate from a school or college following the usual channels. The Dean of Graduate Studies had
explained that graduate courses receive final approval from the schools and colleges and in the case
at hand – since no school or college was involved, the Office of the Dean of Graduate Studies
would be responsible for final approval, not GAC. GAC is now proposing that the Senate Charter
be amended stating that GAC and its Committee on Curriculum & Instruction be charged with final
action approving new or revised University-wide graduate courses. GAC believes that language
should be included in the Charter that is similar to the language addressing undergraduate courses
charging UAC and its Committee on Interdisciplinary Studies with the responsibility for approving
“U” prefixed courses.
A discussion ensued and it was realized that the particular course proposed last spring was a for a
certificate program. It was agreed by Council members that all graduate courses should have a
school or college affiliation as well as having ties to a specific graduate program. That would also
apply to non-traditional or interdisciplinary courses. Consequently such courses too, would have to
be approved by one or more schools or colleges, and should be subject to be properly reported to
the Senate. GOV believes that a separate amendment should be drafted to clarify this point.
Richard Collier agreed to do so and present the draft at the next meeting.
Old Business:
Proposed Charter Amendment re: Council/Committee Chairs:
Secretary Collier had sent out a draft of the proposed amendment to council members. The Chair
had asked for changing the title, eliminating the word “prohibiting”, and Collier proposed
substituting “regarding eligibility to chair senate councils and committees”. Other minor changes
in the amendment itself were suggested. A motion to accept the edited amendment was made,
seconded and approved unanimously.
The Chair proposed that comments regarding the rationale take place via an e-mail discussion and
that an attempt be made to shorten the rationale. It was proposed that the first numbered item of
the rationale be eliminated.
Recommendations re: Process to Create Steering Committee for MSCHE Self-Study:
Members of GOV discussed a possible amendment to the Senate Charter or a resolution which
would convey to the Administration that better consultation than the one exhibited in the process of
creating the Steering Committee needs to take place in the future. The concept of the consultation
process needs to be understood and steps need to be taken that will ensure that the principles
expected by Middle States are not violated. The rationale for introducing the amendment or
resolution could explain how the process was flawed and lacked consultation. The proposed
amendment would, in particular, state that it is the duty of the Senate Chair to meet regularly with
the President to ensure that there is proper consultation. The Chair proposed that he would
formulate a draft for the rationale which would be reviewed by the council’s subgroup designated
for this matter, before presentation to the council at its next meeting.
The meeting adjourned at 5:20
Recorded and submitted by
Gail Cameron
