Members                        “P” denotes Present,  “A” denotes Absent,   “R” denotes Regrets

R

Andrei Barkovskii

P

Ken McGill

P

Karen Berman

P

Michael Murphy

P

Douglas Goings

P

Indiren Pillay

P

Jason Huffman

P

Chandra Power

P

Mandy Jarriel

P

Jason Rich

P

Bryan Marshall

P

John Sirmans

P

Macon McGinley

 Agenda Topic

Discussions & Conclusions

Action or Recommendations

Follow-Up

I. Call to order

Bryan Marshall called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m.

II.  Approval of Agenda

.

A motion was made, seconded, and passed to approve the agenda.

Agenda approved

III. Approval of Minutes

In accordance with procedure adopted at previous meeting, the minutes were submitted to members via e-mail for approval.

Minutes of Sept. 28 meeting were approved pending minor edits.

.

V.  Old Business

(Continuation of issues from previous meeting)

Reports from policy subcommittees.

Reports from subcommittees

 (continued)

Reports from subcommittees (continued).

New Agenda Topic

Ideas for Future Agenda Topics

1. Online/Hybrid Course Meeting Policy (new policy under consideration):    Clarify online/hybrid course meeting requirements and standards for classifying such courses.  

Jason Huffman and Karen Berman, subcommittee, reported that another university committee is working on this policy with Wesley Smith [IDEAS Director] and his associates.  Karen Berman stated that the APC subcommittee will work with them to formulate a policy.

2. Grade Change Policy  (new policy under consideration):

Develop a policy explicitly stating that grades can be changed after the end of a semester only due to faculty error.  Issue of allowing students to submit extra work or giving extra credit to improve grade after course is finished should be addressed within the policy.

Karen Berman and Jason Huffman, subcommittee, reported that the subcommittee has been consulting with Kay Anderson [Registrar] concerning this policy. The current policy has provisions for several sets of criteria that allow for many variables, and instances of students being allowed to submit work after the semester has ended to improve a final grade have been reported.  Berman said that issues of fairness and of liability are among those being considered in drafting the policy. Jason Huffman pointed out that, currently, the change-of-grade form has to be initiated by the instructor, and he added that any policy can be petitioned.  The discussion that followed centered on the possibility that faculty and chairs should be reminded of the policy criteria.    

3. Common Syllabus Repository (new policy under consideration):

Georgia College policy statements currently common to all course syllabi need to be available elsewhere for student access, thereby reducing syllabus size. 

Chandra  Power and Andrei Barkovskii, subcommittee.

Chandra Power displayed the required policy statements on the screen.  Bryan Marshall stated that the Registrar’s office would be responsible for maintaining the website containing the policy statements. Ken McGill suggested that the fire drill statement might not be appropriate for the common repository because each building has a different evacuation plan. Jason Huffman mentioned that the fire drill statement could be a source of legal liability.  Indiren Pillay pointed out that the building evacuation plan is posted in each room of each building, which fulfills any legal requirement.  A suggestion was made that input from the faculty is needed. .

4. Repeating Graduate Courses (new policy). Jason Rich and Indiren Pillay, subcommittee.

No current policy for graduate students repeating failed courses. Should repeating be allowed, and, if so, should the two grades be averaged?

5. Closing Probation Loophole (amendment to current policy) Macon McGinley and John Sirmans, subcommittee.

The committee discussed whether to create a new policy or just add a sentence to an existing policy. The wording was worked on how to change the current policy. Questions were asked about the affect this will have on retention and graduation. Specifically, students that were in trouble early and then again later. We need to get with Kay to see the number of students this will affect, since this will potential expel students one semester earlier, then the current policy.

6. Disastrous Semester Policy (new policy under consideration):

Macon McGinley and John Sirmans, subcommittee. An immediate advisor flag needed for those students that have a “disastrous” semester, rated as a 1.0 GPA with more than 8 credit hours. This flag should help prevent the continuous decline of a student’s GPA before remedial action is taken. 

Macon McGinley displayed the policy proposal on the screen and reported that she is continuing the discussion of this policy with the Registrar who is investigating actual numbers of students potentially affected.  Bryan Marshall suggested that Paul Jahr [Associate Vice President of Student Affairs] would be a good source of such information.

According to McGinley, Anderson suggested that the terms of the policy be integrated into the current policy instead of existing as a separate policy.  The chair called for a motion to that effect.

Chandra Power asked if a separate policy would be required for graduate students.

Bryan Marshall reminded the members that the basic question is how to keep students on track for graduation. Jason Huffman proposed bringing the issue before the Student Government Association to include them in the discussion. Bryan Marshall suggested tabling the issue until some of the questions are answered.

Macon McGinley also suggested changing the name of the policy from “Disastrous” to “Alarming.”  Several members voiced opposition to the term “Alarming.”  The discussion ended with instructions from Chair Marshall for everyone to bring possible adjectives to the next meeting.

7. Two-degree Masters (new policy).

Douglas Goings and Michael Murphy, subcommittee. Can graduate students apply the same course credit toward two degrees?

8. Faculty Compensation for Research 4999 Courses:

Ken McGill reported that he has been researching the possibility of

financial compensation for faculty involved in supporting students enrolled in 4999 Research as a Summer sessions program.  

Karen Berman and Macon McGinley asked if various definitions (artistic, creative, etc.) of “research” are being considered.  McGill responded that 4999 allows faculty to “plug in” whatever type of course they consider research-based. 

A discussion ensued concerning how compensation is generated for Summer courses. Douglass Goings brought up the possibility of independent study courses being included in the plan for faculty compensation.  Jason Huffman listed several points that would eliminate any possibility of procuring 4999 compensation, including “trying to include too much.”  Several possible sources of funding were suggested.  Ken McGill stated that, “philosophically” most faculty would conduct research anyway, and that the original intention of 4999 was to encourage students to become involved with research. Bryan Marshall pointed out that the proposal would, in effect, cause students to pay for their research.  McGill agreed that was the largest downside of the Summer research issue. But, he added, that it would help with Summer revenue.  McGill stated that he had talked with the Dean of the College of Arts & Sciences, and that he would next approach the Provost with the idea.

APC member Mandy Jarriel agreed to join Ken McGill on the “Faculty Compensation for 4999” subcommittee.

Bryan Marshall brought up the possibility of two, eight-week semesters instead of a single, sixteen-week semester as an option for certain courses.  

No action taken. Further reports pending.

No action taken.

Further reports pending.

Motion Submitted to Senate

No action taken.

No action taken;

Further reports pending.

A motion was made, seconded, and approved to integrate the currently designated “Disastrous Semester” policy, into an existing policy.  Actual wording is pending.

No action taken.

No action taken pending further investigation and review.

Items 1,2 ,5, and 6 to be ready  for inclusion on the next meeting’s agenda.

This is finished. There is no need here.

Check with Kay Anderson about how many students will be affected by this new policy. Specifically how many students that get into trouble early and then do okay, then fall back into trouble.

Take to ECUS for more information.

VI.  Next Meeting

The next meeting is scheduled for  2:00 p.m. on November 30, 2012 in Atkinson 110.

VII.  Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 3:05 p.m.

Meeting Dates

08/24/2012

09/28/2012

10/26/2012

Andrei Barkovskii

P

P

R

Karen Berman

P

P

P

Douglass Goings

P

P

P

Jason Huffman

P

P

P

Mandy Jarriel

R

A

P

Bryan Marshal

P

P

P

Ken McGill

R

P

P

Macon McGinley

P

P

P

Michael Murphy

P

P

P

Indiren Pillay

P

P

P

Chandra Power

P

P

P

Jason Rich

P

P

P

John Sirmans

P

P

P