ࡱ> #` (bjbjmm 1%: : : : : : : N ;;;8N;4;N ^"<(J<"l<l<l<G=G=G=h^j^j^j^j^j^j^$`h)c^: %DG=G=%D%D^: : l<l<^5J5J5J%DP: l<: l<h^5J%Dh^5J5J\: : ]l<<  ;uF],^<^0^$]c}H`c(]c: ]@G= S?v5J@,A0G=G=G=^^IXG=G=G=^%D%D%D%DN N N "-$ N N N -N N N : : : : : :  WESTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY Regular Meeting of the FACULTY SENATE Tuesday, 2 October 2007 4:00 p.m. Capitol Rooms - University Union A C T I O N M I N U T E S SENATORS PRESENT: L. Baker-Sperry, C. Blackinton, V. Boynton, K. Clontz, J. Clough, D. Connelly, K. Daytner, J. Deitz, K. Hall, R. Hironimus-Wendt, V. Jelatis, M. Maskarinec, L. Meloy, N. Miczo, D. Mummert, R. Ness, R. Orwig, G. Pettit, S. Rock, M. Siddiqi, B. Sonnek Ex-officio: J. Dallinger, Assistant Provost; T. Kaul, Parliamentarian SENATORS ABSENT: L. Brice GUESTS: Steve Bennett, Mark Butzow, Amy Carr, John Chisholm, Brian Clark, Sean Cordes, Roberta Davilla, John Drea, Sharon Evans, Ken Hawkinson, Phyllida Kornoski, Candace McLaughlin, John Miller, Abdul-Rasheed NaAllah, Nancy Parsons, Polly Radosh, Cindy Ridle, Phyllis Rippey, David Rohall, Jim Schmidt, Joseph Schmitz, Aimee Shouse, Bill Thompson I. Consideration of Minutes 18 September 2007 Grammatical and typographical corrections: Page 8, last paragraph, the usage general consensus is redundant. Page 9, line 4, should be no longer. Page 9, second paragraph, line 8, should read do rather than does. APPROVED AS CORRECTED II. A. Provosts Report Assistant Provost Judi Dallinger presented the report for Associate Provost Baily, who was attending the first of the UPI contract implementation meetings. She informed senators that the Masters of Liberal Arts and Sciences was approved by the Illinois Board of Higher Education today. B. SGA Report (Phyllida Kornoski, SGA representative to Faculty Senate) Library Dean Phyllis Self spoke to the Student Government Association at its last meeting. SGA asked Dean Self about the possibility of Malpass Library remaining open 24 hours during finals week. Student Government Association held a Best Seat in the House raffle at ֱs Homecoming football game. SGA President Sam Pfister presented a report at Fridays Board of Trustees meeting followed by attending the ground breaking for the new Multicultural Center. He also attended a ribbon cutting for the new student bleachers at Hanson Field C. Other Announcements 1. Hoyet Hemphill will replace Dale Adkins as the representative from the Chairs Council to the ad hoc Foreign Language/Global Issues Committee. 2. The Office of Public Safety website offers information on how to deal with active shooters at  HYPERLINK "http://www.wiu.edu/shooter/" http://www.wiu.edu/shooter/. 3. President Goldfarb would like feedback on whether both mens and womens athletic teams at ֱ should be called Leathernecks. 4. First Year Experience Status Report and Draft Strategic Plan (Judi Dallinger, Assistant Provost for Undergraduate Studies) Senators received in their packets reports on the First Year Experience (FYE) at ֱ. The status report indicates that over 100 sections of FYE classes have been offered each semester in the two years that the program has been operational, with class sizes ranging from 18-20 students. Peer mentors for each section of FYE classes continue to receive training and a $250 stipend for successfully completing their task requirements. Dr. Dallinger will be working with CAGAS this semester to consider a proposed requirement for completion of one FYE course for each of the two semesters of a students freshman year. The current policy merely requires enrollment in one FYE course for each of the semesters. The status report states that The FYE Committee did not exist separately from the Foundations of Excellence Steering Committee during 2006-2007, and The FYE Steering Plan includes action items for restructuring the FYE Committee for the future. WIU was one of 19 four-year institutions chosen to participate in the year-long Foundations of Excellence self-study process. This process involved the creation of nine committees to examine the nine principles that constitute a model first year, as identified by the non-profit Policy Center on the First Year of College. The work of these committees led to the draft FYE Strategic Plan being shared with governance groups this semester. The Plan consists of a description of the strengths and accomplishments currently part of the FYE program as well as a list of action items designed to guide the future of the program. Additional information about the FYE Program and Foundations of Excellence can be found on the recently updated FYE website,  HYPERLINK "http://www.wiu.edu/FYE" www.wiu.edu/FYE. III. Reports of Committees and Councils A. Council on Curricular Programs and Instruction (CCPI) (Nancy Parsons, Chair) 1. Requests for New Courses a. AAS 479, Practicum in Survey Research Methods, 3 s.h. David Rohall, Director of the Survey Research Center in Tillman Hall, explained that the interdisciplinary Survey Research Methods minor was initiated last year, and each department involved was asked to develop a capstone course so that students could perform survey projects within their own fields. Change to AAS 479, POLS 479, PSY 479, SOC 479: change bullet on page 2 in the Course Objectives from use statistical programs such as STATA or SPSS to perform surveys, to use statistical programs to analyze the results of surveys. AAS 479 APPROVED WITH CHANGE b. JOUR 400, Topics in Journalism, 3 s.h. JOUR 400 APPROVED c. JOUR 414, Journalism and Ethics, 3 s.h. Senator Pettit noted that the current title makes it appear as though there are two separate topics to be discussed in the course. English and Journalism professor Mark Butzow responded that the title was originally Ethics in Journalism, which he prefers, but it was changed at the request of the Philosophy and Religious Studies Chair. Change: Change title to Ethics in Journalism and change abbreviated title accordingly. JOUR 414 APPROVED WITH CHANGE d. MKTG 479, Marketing Practicum in Survey Research Methods, 3 s.h. MKTG 479 APPROVED e. POLS 479, Practicum in Survey Research Methods, 3 s.h. f. PSY 479, Practicum in Survey Research Methods, 3 s.h. g. SOC 479, Practicum in Survey Research Methods, 3 s.h. POLS 479, PSY 479 AND SOC 479 APPROVED WITH ABOVE CHANGE 2. Request for New Minor a. Survey Research Methods Senator Boynton noted that the minor does not have much of a core, with only SOC 432/POLS 432 taken by all. She noted that in the past, the NCA accrediting body had issues with majors and minors with what they deemed to be insufficient cores to be considered cohesive programs. Dr. Parsons responded that this is not an issue under todays standards and that this was not included in the new definitions of academic programs approved by Faculty Senate last spring. NEW MINOR APPROVED Dr. Parsons announced that a forum to go over the curriculum approval process will be held by CCPI at 3:00 p.m. Thursday, October 11 in the Lincoln Room. An email invitation has gone out to deans and chairs with a request that the information be forwarded to faculty on departmental and college curriculum committees. B. Committee on Committees (CoC) (Kevin Hall, Chair) SENATE COUNCILS AND COMMITTEES: Writing Instruction in the Disciplines Committees Angela Ferree, Curr & Instr replacing Katharine Pawelko Fall 07 E&HS SGA COUNCILS: Council on Student Activities Funds Angela Ferree, Curr & Instr replacing Mike McGowan 10 E&HS AD HOC COMMITTEES: Higher Values in Higher Education Review/Update Team Kathy Neumann, Comp Sci new position B&T Presidents Technology Advisory Users Group Rafael Obregon, Eng Tech replacing Martin Maskarinec B&T THE NOMINEES WERE DECLARED ELECTED IV. Old Business A. General Education Review Committee (GERC) (Aimee Shouse, Chair) 1. Final Report In an email included with senators packets, Senator Pettit made a motion to strike section e.) of the Council on General Education (CGE) Request for Inclusion form included on p. 23 of the GERC report. This portion of the form asks Where relevant, explain how this course incorporates multicultural perspectives (cultural pluralism). Senator Pettits email explains that he fully supports incorporating multicultural perspectives into the classroom but believes that this portion of the form, which is driven by the CGE General Criteria for Inclusion, is related solely to content or pedagogy. He told senators that pp. 14-15 of the GERC report, which encourage faculty to use language, pedagogy, content, and course examples that help students to understand that many perspectives and values unite us in common humanity, do not provide a helpful direction and contradicts an earlier statement that the intention is not to direct the content of the course. He noted that the second bullet point on p. 15 of the report Will any of the course objectives acknowledge the unique interests and needs of people who vary in ethnicity, sexual orientation or gender? should be a universal yes if the course is to be at all relevant. Discussion of methods of presentation that ensure accessibility for students of all cultural backgrounds and contributions from members of traditionally underrepresented groups on p. 15 are, according to Senator Pettit, directed to the specific pedagogy of the course the lecture, textbooks, and supplemental materials, which vary quite significantly from instructor to instructor. He noted that any response to e.) on the form would not have any guiding or staying power over the course if it is taught by a different instructor, so to include it does not accomplish anything. Senator Pettit asserted that programs and workshops that will be developed by CGE as specified in the recently-approved Senate Bylaws amendment would be a better place for this issue to be addressed. Dr. Shouse responded that the multicultural aspect of Gen Ed is a long-standing policy and one that GERC was not asked to evaluate during its review. She stated that the Committee considered changes to the Request for Inclusion in General Education form to be a housekeeping function that GERC undertook as part of developing a fully-designed form. Dr. Shouse stated that the issue of pedagogy was considered by GERC in its discussion of this portion of the Guidelines, and many members expressed concerns similar to Senator Pettits. She said GERCs intention is not to compel a faculty member to do something he or she would not do ordinarily, and that the expectation for the Gen Ed curriculum as a whole to include multiculturalism and writing has been in place for 13 years. Dr. Shouse stated GERC ultimately reaffirmed that multiculturalism is an integral part of what General Education ought to embody. Dr. Shouse told senators that if Faculty Senate rejects this portion of the Request for Inclusion form, they would be making a significant change to CGE policy. She said that CGE Guideline C.2., It is expected that all General Education courses will include, to the extent feasible, consideration of multicultural issues or pedagogy, included the proviso to the extent feasible because GERC recognized that this is up to the individual faculty member teaching the course. Senator Baker-Sperry, who chaired GERC in 2005-2006, pointed out that CGE has always evaluated course syllabi for course content with the understanding that this is fluid depending upon the faculty member teaching the course. Senator Pettit responded that there is value in requesting a syllabus when a new course is proposed to check that the content matches the request and that the course will be functional. He stated the issue in question is a different case because the syllabus would only establish that the materials are available to cover the necessary ground in the course, whereas the multicultural question is more of a case of pedagogy. Senator Pettit disagreed that to remove this question would be to change CGE policy, stating that ֱ has established a multicultural perspective in its current culture and the question on the Inclusion form is not the way to promote it. Dr. Shouse responded that it is generally recognized that Gen Ed has a different importance than curriculum as a whole. She agreed that WIU has reaffirmed multiculturalism for some time, but she feels that it very relevant for GERC to want faculty to address this. Senator Pettit noted that CCPI has grappled with this issue as well and removed the question from their new course request forms. Dr. Shouse responded that CCPI representatives were concerned that the question was being addressed in a superficial way on their forms while CGE has not had that happen. Senator Hironimus-Wendt pointed out that the questions on the Request for Inclusion form regarding incorporation of multiculturalism and of writing seem to allow for a response that the course will not incorporate one or the other of these guidelines. He pointed out that a Math professor who is told that his course must be both writing intensive and multicultural could rightfully feel that he is being told how he must teach Math. Dr. Shouse responded that the Math example was one that came up for discussion at GERC, but the issue is not one of content but of ways of presenting information. Dr. Shouse asserted she cannot imagine how a Math professor could not use multicultural content in his or her course; one example would include being conscious not to always refer to mathematicians as he. Senator Ness added that the statement where relevant seems to allow that professors could indicate that use of multicultural perspectives in their course is not relevant but that professors would continue to be sensitive to multicultural language. Mathematics professor John Chisholm stated that if the proposal is asking for usage of a particular pedagogical style such as gender-inclusive language, that would be fine, but most faculty tend to read the requirement as content-inclusive. He stated that in the past the boilerplate response has been that when there are contributions from minorities or other cultures, those are highlighted, although in his field the vast majority of contributions are from ֱ Europe. Senator Baker-Sperry observed that if the question is omitted from the form, conversations such as this will not occur because there will not be the expectation that it needs to be discussed at CGE. Senator Pettit stated he does not see the form as allowing for a not applicable response to the multiculturalism question, that it is not set up for this to be an acceptable answer. He said the expectation is that the person filling out the form will speak about lectures, materials, and pedagogy that fluctuates and changes from individual to individual. He added that one persons illustrations can be very different than anothers; for example, where one professor may use gender-neutral names, another may be very conscious to use ethnic names, and he does not see the value of presenting one specific case on the form. Dr. Shouse stated that if she saw this portion of the guidelines and form as pertaining only to content, she would have had a problem with it. She doesnt agree that a response of not relevant would automatically exclude a course from Gen Ed but feels it would be a point to begin deliberation. Senator Daytner stated that if the portion of the form requesting an explanation of the courses multicultural perspectives is stricken, then it would seem that writing is more important than multiculturalism in Gen Ed. She feels either both parts of the form should stay or both should be removed because they are equally important parts of General Education. Senator Boynton asked what is the default expectation on the form: that a response of not applicable will be taken into consideration by CGE or that it would not be acceptable? She believes the expectation would be to provide a response to the question but that CGE could make the decision that it is not appropriate in all cases. Senator Maskarinec stated that the phrase where relevant was included in question e.) on the form for this specific purpose; he objects to removal of the question because then the discussion about relevance will never occur. Senator Maskarinec also noted that if the question is removed from the form, the expectation of multiculturalism should also be removed from CGEs Guidelines and General Criteria for Inclusion. Chairperson Rock asked for a second to Senator Pettits motion to strike e.) from the Request for Inclusion form. Senator Clontz seconded. Senators then discussed whether items in the report could be changed on the floor since the report as a whole had not yet been objected to, and whether this was applicable since GERC is not a standing Senate committee. SENATOR BOYNTON OBJECTED TO THE REPORT Motion: To restore the GERC report to the agenda (Jelatis/Baker-Sperry) MOTION TO RESTORE APPROVED 17 YES 3 NO 1 AB MOTION TO REMOVE E.) FROM THE FORM FAILED 1 YES 19 NO 1 AB Senator Meloy pointed out that since all teacher education programs are standards-based, they run from 124-150 s.h. currently, and it would be a great burden if they had to increase their Humanities requirement. She stated that affected departments anticipate a tremendous amount of work to obtain allowances for this requirement to be waived by CGE and asked if teacher education programs could be grandfathered in since currently they take two Fine Arts and one Humanities. Dr. Shouse responded that History has a similar problem, but she does not feel that the appeals process will be onerous on the affected departments and it is not unprecedented for teacher education departments to request special consideration of Gen Ed requirements. When asked if there is a role that CAGAS could play in this process, former chair John Miller responded that it appears to be strictly a CGE issue and would not come before CAGAS. University Advising and Academic Support Center Director Candace McLaughlin asked if it could be assumed that if a student entered as an Education major and then changed majors, the student could remain under the formers CGE guidelines. CGE Chair Phyllis Rippey noted that the reason GERC recommended only one Fine Arts course be required is because the COFAC Dean was not confident that his college could accommodate a greatly increased demand for their courses. She stated that since there was not an academic reason behind how the requirement was structured, if a student had six Fine Arts semester hours and three semester hours in Humanities, it would probably be allowed. Motion: To accept the GERC report (Sonnek/Orwig) MOTION APPROVED 19 YES 2 NO 0 AB Chairperson Rock issued his thanks to all members of the General Education Review Committee on behalf of Faculty Senate, and Senator Sonnek added that their ability to answer the Senates questions has been very helpful. Dr. Shouse also added her thanks to Senator Baker-Sperry who chaired the initial Review Committee which did the background readings and peer review that enabled the members to be in a position to answer questions. B. Establishment of Ad Hoc Committee on Implementation of Plus-Minus Grading Proposed Charge: To make recommendations to Faculty Senate about: the grade point average to be assigned to plus-minus grades the impact on existing policies and procedures (to include, but not be limited to, academic progress, prerequisites, pass/fail, honors, and graduation requirements applicable to majors/minors/ university/gen ed) departmental gateways whether faculty should be required to utilize plus-minus grading multiple sections of courses with different standards Proposed Membership: 1 representative from the Council on Admission, Graduation and Academic Standards 1 representative from the Council on Curricular Programs and Instruction 1 representative from the Council on General Education 1 representative from the Graduate Council 1 senator 1 advisor 1-2 representatives from the Registrars Office Friendly amendment: That a student representative be added to the committee (Hironimus-Wendt) Friendly amendment: That faculty representatives be specified from the councils (Boynton) PROPOSAL WITH FRIENDLY AMENDMENTS APPROVED 20 YES 0 NO 0 AB V. New Business A. Funding for Travel and Research Senators Sonnek and Siddiqi had presented Faculty Senate with an email, also addressed to the College of Arts and Sciences Faculty Council, urging both bodies to take up the issue of funding faculty research and travel at a significantly higher level. Senator Sonnek noted that the Department of English and Journalism, with 33 Unit A and 30 Unit B faculty funded for travel, received $10,000 in travel funds in 1997 and just $12,000 in 2007, making it difficult for junior faculty to deliver the presentations and perform the research needed for promotion and tenure. Two possible motions, proposed by Senator Sonnek and seconded by Senator Siddiqi, were distributed for senators to consider: It is moved that the travel funds available to faculty for furthering their scholarly and professional activities be increased appropriately. Any travel fund allocation to faculty must also consider the conference registration fee in calculating the total cost of travel. That Faculty Senate establish a committee to study the level of funding for travel to conferences, workshops, and seminars for enhancing professional and scholarly activities. The committee is charged to submit its finding and recommendation within three months from the time it is appointed by the Senate. Senator Jelatis stated she felt this was an important and valuable conversation when it occurred at the COAS Faculty Council, and she thinks it is vital to share the information. She feels the problem is similar in all colleges and departments at WIU, but there is confusion as to whether Faculty Senate can do anything to relieve the issue. Senator Boynton agreed, stating the increased emphasis upon the importance of scholarship does not seem to be accompanied by an increase in the level of funding. She stated the History Department is hit hard because it has many younger faculty and because historians often must travel overseas to do research before they can get published. Senator Clontz stated that LEJA faculty were told that the only dollars available would be allocated to the five new faculty, which shuts out associate faculty from consideration. He predicted that the University will either have to reverse the push for more research or provide additional funding. Senator Sonnek agreed, stating her department feels it is being pressured to publish and do more research. Senator Connelly suggested that a committee could examine what it costs each faculty member across campus to attend their primary conference. He asked, though, where additional money would be housed should it be granted: in a huge fund that faculty would have to apply for or within individual departments. Senator Meloy stated the best way to urge action on the issue would be to collect data, stating there is wide variability across departments and colleges as to what money is available, how faculty obtain it, and how much faculty must fund themselves. Senator Meloy stated her support for a committee to gather this information so that a scholarly and researched report can be made to Faculty Senate to support the need for additional funding, rather than simply stating that faculty need more money. Chairperson Rock pointed out that lack of sufficient funding for travel and research stems from budget issues in Illinois, and faculty may have to face the difficult reality of trading less money for raises for additional travel funds. Senator Hironimus-Wendt pointed out that when faculty attend conferences, they learn about other ideas and research they can incorporate to improve the quality of classroom instruction, and he urged senators not to lose sight of the bigger picture, that the issue is also about teaching as well as about research. Senators Pettit and Ness expressed their support for Motion #2. Senator Ness stated he would like a committee to address the issue of national versus international conferences, stating that three of the past six years, the major conferences in his field have been held in international venues. He added that part of the importance of faculty travel is to keep up with changes in the discipline and to interact with peers. Senator Siddiqi stated he also supports Motion #2, since it would highlight the variation between funding for different departments and colleges and would indicate the Senates support of faculty and scholarly activities. The senator pointed out that his college in the past matched dollar for dollar the cost of faculty presentations but later the allowance was changed to a flat $300, increased to $350 last year and $400 this year no matter where the faculty member is traveling to present. He hopes that the committee can also come up with some general guidelines for funding. When the question was raised what Faculty Senate could actually do since it does not control the budget, senators suggested that Senate could raise the issue and empower faculty to say that this is important to them. When asked how this should be communicated, it was pointed out that President Goldfarb will speak to Faculty Senate on October 16 and the point could be raised then. Parliamentarian Kaul stated that if Senate wants to send a message, a resolution would be the best route since it could be voted upon and forwarded to the President rather than creating a committee without teeth. Senator Blackinton stated she would like to know how the funds are allocated. Speaking from his experience as a chair, Parliamentarian Kaul explained that for the past 25 years, the funds have come into a single port and are distributed from the Provost to the individual colleges. He said deans can intervene and decide how the funds will be distributed to the departments within their colleges. He concluded the funding is mostly based upon the previous years allocation. Senator Baker-Sperry told senators that since the line of funding goes through the deans office, the composition of a possible committee would be important. She stated that if Senate votes to establish an ad hoc committee, it could be charged to collect data on: the amount funded per faculty member; distribution of conferences for that discipline or department; degree to which funds are matched; explanation of how new monies might be distributed; what degree the Senate can control how the deans disperse funds; and how much additional funding would be helpful. Senator Siddiqi suggested that Senate pass a resolution now expressing the general concerns about the inappropriately low levels of funding for travel and research. He added that if a committee is also charged with studying the practices of different departments and the means used by various deans to determine levels of funding, it will lend support to the resolution and begin the conversation across campus as committee members write letters to deans and departments and gather data. The senator noted that many thousands of dollars are spent on bringing speakers to campus, so there is funding available for certain priorities. Senator Clontz noted that the Universitys Strategic Plan speaks a lot about research. He asserted that with a Ph.D. program in Educational Leadership and the development of a second in law enforcement, if ֱ is to become a doctoral-level institution there needs to be funding allocated for this mandate. Senator Meloy noted that along with funding from the Presidents budget, departments receive indirect cost money from grants. She stated that the ad hoc committee could study this, present the argument that this may present possible funding options, and make suggestions on how to prioritize those funds, emphasizing that this represents professional development and benefits ֱs students. Senator Ness stated that the advantage of establishing a committee is that it will show comparisons between colleges and offer data that have not been presented before. Senator Boynton agreed that there is value in having an information-based report to back up a resolution. She suggested that the committee also gather data from peer institutions regarding what levels of support faculty receive elsewhere. Ms. Kornoski suggested that the committee should gather information and make its recommendation before Faculty Senate passes a resolution which could include the committees findings. Senator Meloy concurred, adding that the establishment of an ad hoc committee makes a statement in and of itself. Senator Maskarinec agreed with Ms. Kornoski that a committee should present its findings before sending a resolution, but suggested that President Goldfarb be asked to establish the committee so that it would be empowered to accomplish something. Parliamentarian Kaul agreed that this would have more teeth than a Senate-established committee. Senator Boynton asked if who would control the committee if it was established by the President. Professor Sean Cordes from Malpass Library stated that at Iowa State, following an extensive review, faculty funding was divided into level tiers. A grant was created from any monies not used that was parceled out based upon potential impact to the institution or to the faculty members field, whether the faculty member would be able to publish with the additional funds, and potential for research in a given area. Professor Cordes told senators that Iowa State distributed $5,000 through the grant, and three articles were published as part of the projects that were funded. SENATOR MELOY CALLED THE QUESTION Friendly amendment: That Motions #1 and #2 be combined with the stipulation That Faculty Senate request the President establish a committee (Siddiqi) Senator Hironimus-Wendt stated he would prefer to support Motion #2 as it was originally written, pointing out that if Senate were to ask the President to establish the committee it would introduce a lot of complexity. Senators Boynton and Jelatis agreed. Senator Baker-Sperry pointed out that if the report of a President-appointed committee would go to President Goldfarb rather than to Faculty Senate. Senator Boynton added that the President would also determine who is to be on the committee, the number of administrators and faculty, and its charge. She wondered why Faculty Senate would wish to ask ֱs administration to establish a committee to investigate how that administration is under-funding faculty. Senator Maskarinec responded that a committee examining funding in 39 different departments could potentially do a lot of work just to have the President say that he is funding faculty as best he can, thus, he would support the President taking charge of the committee from the beginning. Senator Siddiqi declared his support for Motion #2, stating that when the committee finding is presented it could be included with a follow-up resolution to the President. FRIENDLY AMENDMENT WITHDRAWN SENATOR JELATIS CALLED THE QUESTION MOTION TO CALL THE QUESTION APPROVED 20 YES 0 NO 0 AB MOTION #2 TO ESTABLISH A COMMITTEE APPROVED 18 YES 2 NO 0 AB Chairperson Rock volunteered the Executive Committee to develop a recommendation for the charge and committee membership to bring back to the next Senate meeting. Senator Sonnek expressed concerns about approaching President Goldfarb at the next Senate meeting before data can be gathered on this issue. Senator Hironimus-Wendt concurred. He affirmed that ֱ has a President who is a champion of the faculty so he is confident that when the committee presents its data, President Goldfarb will take the information to the state level, but to bring the issue up at the next meeting seems unnecessary. B. Discussion of Senate Response to the Library Deans Request for an Ad Hoc Information Literacy Review Study Committee Chairperson Rock stated that the Executive Committee discussed this proposal last week but experienced some problems addressing it. Senator Connelly told senators that it seems like a big task that needs some clear definition if Faculty Senate is to comprise a committee. Senator Hironimus-Wendt told senators that during his tenure at Millikin there was a requirement that new students pass a library research skills requirement their first semester at the institution, and he is in favor of such a requirement. He feels the current proposal, however, seems inappropriate, comparing it to the Math department telling Faculty Senate their students are not prepared to do math so the department would like Senate to explore ways to enhance their math proficiency. He feels it would be more appropriate for Library faculty to suggest to CGE ways to incorporate library proficiency skills into the Gen Ed curriculum. Senator Baker-Sperry told senators that Library representatives did this, and GERC discussed over two meetings whether information literacy was appropriate to be included in Gen Ed. She added the discussion occurred very recently and would have significantly extended the Gen Ed review. GERC felt that the issue was larger than Gen Ed and should be considered as a graduation requirement. Senator Baker-Sperry stated the Library did not bring a recommendation or a request to GERC but brought up the issue for general discussion, and GERC recommended that they formulate a more thorough proposal. Professor Cordes, who drafted the proposal, stated the issue is not specific to the Library but is being raised across the US by those concerned that these applied/extra-subject-related/co-curricular skills be applied to every department. He stated that the Library is teaching 250 information literacy-based research sessions every semester, up from 31 in 2003, with less staff. Professor Cordes told senators that faculty increasingly bring him assignments that include information literacy activities, but when he asks professors how they feel about information literacy, they do not know what the term means. He does not believe that faculty members should be taught how to utilize information literacy but that the resources should be made available to them. Professor Cordes stated that since Library support for course-related instruction has been offered, 75 faculty participated in 2003, 100 in 2003, and nearly 300 in 2005. Professor Cordes told senators he would like to put together a group of people to examine syllabi and recruit focus groups over a five- to six-week period to examine whether an information literacy agenda fits WIU and is needed. He said the Library is willing to recruit faculty members to provide an overall review of where the University stands and how far the institution wants to move forward. Professor Cordes stated that at most peer liberal arts institutions the size of ֱ, information literacy is part of Gen Ed and in some cases libraries may not even participate. He added that the issue is also embedded in the requirements of a number of accrediting bodies across the US. Senator Ness said that Iowa State requires a one-half semester hour library course requirement for graduation. Professor Cordes stated that a course which teaches similar content exists at ֱ (LIB 201); two sections of this course are being offered this semester and it is being used as a model to move toward an upper-level BOT-BA course that the Library may develop. Senator Sonnek stated that although literacy issues in information science is something the institution should be interested in, she is not sure that a committee is necessary and feels Faculty Senate is being asked to evaluate a program. Senator Maskarinec pointed out that the University as a whole has no requirement that students possess any technological literacy when they graduate, although it is in the Strategic Plan that they should. Professor Cordes responded that technological literacy, environmental literacy, and protocol literacies are all part of information literacy, and every department has different types of literacy issues that need addressed. Senator Baker-Sperry told senators that when this issue was discussed by GERC, they felt the need for some type of recommendation to respond to, and she is unsure that a committee of uninformed individuals will come back with a good recommendation. Professor Cordes pointed out that he has recommended a list of potential cross-discipline committee members, to include representation from CGE, the Board of Trustees degree program, and the Writing Center. Motion: To adjourn (Clontz/Boynton) MOTION APPROVED 20 YES 0 NO 0 AB The Faculty Senate adjourned at 5:59 p.m. Darlos Mummert, Secretary Annette Hamm, Faculty Senate Recording Secretary     PAGE  PAGE 4 3ABKTY    u BFY[OPyz{#_5B^bl||s|h#2h#2CJh#2h7CJh#2h76CJh"th7>*CJhh70JCJjhh7CJUjh7CJU h7>* h7>*CJh75>*CJh756CJhJh756CJ h76CJ h75CJ h7CJh7,BZ[e   p q  ;  & Fgd7  ^ `@&$a$$@&a$@&' !"RBCZ[ p0^p`0gd7  & F^ & Fgd7^^= _`0Tp@ P !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I@ ^@ `gd7  ^ ` `no56rs p^pgd7 gd7  & F p0^p`0gd7ln^_4q$~>CUõ왏셙{{r{h[h7CJh[h75CJhfh9h75CJhfh9h7>*CJhfh9h7CJh h7>*CJh h7CJ h75CJ h7>*CJh7hh70JCJjhh7CJUjh7CJU h7CJh h7B*CJph,%&z{?@UV H I d h  gd7 p^pgd7    ! - ; A G N c ^"p"r"###### $ $>$$$$$$%%%;%j%%%%%%& &4&<<??ֳֳ~ h#2CJh\h76CJ hlCJhg$h7>*CJhg$h75>*CJh75>*CJ h7>*CJh h7CJhEh7CJhfh9h7>*CJ h75CJhph75CJhGh75CJ h7CJhfh9h7CJ. Z"["q"r"##### $ $>$$$$$$$$% 0]0^` ^`  p^pgd7 gd7%%<%i%j%%%%%%&&5&p4 \`0TP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF Igd72 _`08TP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I  ^ ^` |]|^` 5&M&N&b&c&Q.R./33}9[[[[[9 _`08TP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I^gd75 _`08TP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF Igd74 \`0TP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF Igd7 }9~9H@I@BBIHJHIIII$J%JVJWJJJPPQQ9Q9 _`08TP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I^gd7??n?u?IIIII%JJPPQ9QRRR?SASVVV WRWrWsWWWWWWWXYY"Ycdssxx|}﫤ؚzphr(h75CJhh76CJh\h\CJh\h7CJh7h&h75CJ h7>*CJhCzqh7>*CJhPh7CJh_r[h75CJholh75CJ h\CJ h75CJh"(h75CJ h#2CJ h7CJh#2B*CJph,9Q:QRR@SASSSTTRRR6 & F Y`0P !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF Igd72 Y`0P !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF Igd7 `0gd79 _`08TP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I^gd7 TT"U#U:UUUVGVUVcVVV2 Y`0P !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF Igd76 & F Y`0P !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF Igd7 VVVQWRWWWWWaa1 \`0TP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I5 _`08TP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF Igd76 Y`0P !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I^gd7WWWZZ[[\p>p2 PP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I^gd71 & F PP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF Igd72 PP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I^gd7+ PP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I\\aa@dAdjfkf^j_jllnno2 PP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I^gd7. PP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF Igd7oo p,p`ppppQsRswwzmmmmm2 PP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I^gd7. PP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF Igd71 & F PP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF Igd7 zz||}}}}EFcdĂłk2 PP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I^gd7}}}g}|}FcdςjkpݎE&2VX*+,4Qwx hD}jhD}Uhzh75 h75h7h{^h7CJ h,~?CJ hrCJ hO*mCJ h7>*CJhCzqh7>*CJh?h7CJh>h75CJhgh75CJh?h756CJ h75CJ h7CJ/klڋۋ]^+,PQ & F6 PP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF I`^``gd7+ PP !$`'0*-/2p5@8;=@CPF IQwxƘ̘ $&`#$ & F p@ P@&^`P & F p@ P^`P & F@& & F !"#$&'( h7CJhD}hl0JmHnHuh,~? h,~?0Jjh,~?0JU$%&'( & F p@ P@&^`P/ 01h/ =!8"8#$h% DyK http://www.wiu.edu/shooter/yK Phttp://www.wiu.edu/shooter/yX;H,]ą'cDyK www.wiu.edu/FYEyK Fhttp://www.wiu.edu/FYEyX;H,]ą'c#@@@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH P@P Heading 1$ & F @& >*CJaJR@R Heading 2$ & F@&^5CJ\aJH@H Heading 3$ & F@& >*CJaJJ@J Heading 4$ & F@&5CJ\aJZ@Z Heading 5$ & F@&]^5CJ\aJDA@D Default Paragraph FontViV  Table Normal :V 44 la (k@(No List XOX Level 17$8$H$^OJQJ_HaJmH sH tH XOX Level 4@ 7$8$H$^@ OJQJ_HaJmH sH tH XOX Level 3p7$8$H$^pOJQJ_HaJmH sH tH XO"X Level 57$8$H$^OJQJ_HaJmH sH tH XC@2X Body Text Indent ^ >*CJaJ6B@B6 Body TextCJaJ4 @R4 Footer  !.)@a. Page NumberXR@rX Body Text Indent 2 & F^CJaJ6U@6 Hyperlink >*B*phXS@X Body Text Indent 3 & F^CJaJB>@B Title$L^La$5CJ\aJFV@F FollowedHyperlink >*B* phZYZ  Document Map-D M CJOJQJ^JaJtN@1t Body Text First Indent 2 hx^h` >*CJaJ@O@ WP9_Title $1$a$5aJh^@h Normal (Web)&ddd[$\$]^CJOJQJaJ*W@* Strong5\6O6 level1!dd[$\$H"H  Balloon Text"CJOJQJ^JaJ(BZ[epq;!"RBCZ[  ` n o 56rs%&z{?@UV  HIdhZ[qr  ><ij5MNbcQ&R&'++}1~1H8I8::I@J@AAAA$B%BVBWBBBHHII9I:IJJ@KAKKKLLL"M#M:MMMNGNUNcNNNNNQOROOOOOOORRSSTTYY@\A\j^k^^b_bddffgg h,h`hhhhQkRkoorrttuuuuEzFzczdzzzzz{{k}l}}}ڃۃ]^+,PQwxƐ̐ $%&)0000B000e0e0e0e0000000000 0 0 00000000000 0 0 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 00000000000000000000000 00 000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0@000@000@000@000@0@0@0@0@0@000%&z{?@UV  HIdhZ[qr  ><ij5MNbcQ&R&'++}1uuuEzFzczdzzzzz{{k}l}}}ڃۃ]^+,PQwxƐ̐)0706040000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000080000 000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 000H $$$'l?}(MRTYad  %5&}99QTVW\ozkQ$(NPQSUVWXZ[\]^_`bce'OO z ^(XX  '!!8@0(  B S  ?%/Z/\//D/B/\/l//ݝ/l/d/L//#/l///// G// //D/ / //T/d///Ą////D/ On7+P+P6P\\^rrretetjtXX@@\\a!)      !#"$|72P:P:P\\^rrritototZZBB`ff '')    !#"$=%*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceName=#*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceTypeB *urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagscountry-region9*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsState9"*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsplace {%%#""%#"%#"%%#""#%"""%#"%#" ""%#"%#HR/5bhrydkMQTYPSv(|(>>??@@ddooppq qrrKtQtxx;Cek)/Ŋٍdj &)9?$$o==>>@@7BCBWBkBzBBiDsDI&I@MNMMMMMN,NMNTN[NbNtOOSSWWWW"\3\hhzzzzzDK Xd &)333333333333333333333333333333333333O ^ b b k k 77n7u7AAPPPPQQ55݆ #) &)]FR<dGj'Da$\T[\a N L pR7.%{i5h^`OJQJo(hHhpp^p`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHhPP^P`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh  ^ `OJQJo(hHhpp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ @ ^@ `OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHhPP^P`OJQJo(hHh  ^ `OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hH0^`0o(.p0p^p`0o(. L ^ `L.  ^ `.xx^x`.HLH^H`L.^`.^`.L^`L.h $ $ ^$ `hH.h   ^ `hH.h L^`LhH.h ^`hH.h dd^d`hH.h 4L4^4`LhH.h ^`hH.h ^`hH.h L^`LhH.h$ $ ^$ `OJQJo(hHh  ^ `OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHhdd^d`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh44^4`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hH88^8`o(.^`. L ^ `L.  ^ `.xx^x`.HLH^H`L.^`.^`.L^`L.h$ $ ^$ `OJQJo(hHh  ^ `OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHhdd^d`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh44^4`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHL p'Da$]<\a[.%{                                               #2,~?\O*m7lHD}r80lBk}+)y0N7070@\oo\H\\o\o(`@UnknownGz Times New Roman5Symbol3& z Arial71 Courier5& zaTahoma7&  Verdana?5 z Courier New;Wingdings"1hRC&_JF9JF&^{J^{J84d 2qHX ?@Z2WESTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY Annette Hamm Annette Hamm(       Oh+'0 ,8 X d p |WESTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITYAnnette Hamm Normal.dotAnnette Hamm7Microsoft Office Word@dN@7C| @< @& ^{՜.+,D՜.+,` hp  ֱ Illinois UniversityJ' WESTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY Title 8@ _PID_HLINKSA %:http://www.wiu.edu/FYEo>#http://www.wiu.edu/shooter/o  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefhijklmnpqrstuvwxyz{|}~Root Entry Fp  Data g1TableocWordDocument1SummaryInformation(DocumentSummaryInformation8CompObjq  FMicrosoft Office Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q