R. Blecksmith for A. Doederlein (LAS), L. Derscheid (HHS), C. Downing (BUS),
W. Goldenberg (VPA), D. Gough (HHS), C.T. Lin (LAS), S. Linden (LAS),
K. Millis (LAS), N. Osorio (LIB), L. Rigg (LAS), D. Rusin (LAS),
E. Seaver (Vice Provost) D. Sinason (BUS), J. Stewart (EET), L. Stoffel
(VPA), T. Wasonga for L. Townsend (EDUC), E. Wilkins (EDUC)
Absent: N. Boubekri (EET), Student: L. Krueger (EDUC).
K. Van Mol (Catalog Editor/Curriculum Coordinator)
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
MOTION: D. SINASON/L. DERSCHEID MOVED TO ADOPT THE AGENDA. THE MOTION CARRIED.
A. Electronic Approval of Minutes
The minutes of December 4, 2003 were electronically approved.
APASC - K. Millis
On behalf of APASC, K. Millis moved that the UCC receive the December 3, 2003 minutes. The motion carried.
K. Millis said one of the major items was the art education limited admission program. He said they wanted to increase the GPA from 2.5 to 2.75. He said this is basically resource based and there are some issues in terms of increasing the quality of the program. He said the University of Illinois is placing student teachers in our area so our students have to be more competitive. He said there are new state standards which require higher qualification for teachers. He said this passed. He said that the discussion went to limited retention programs. He said there was a call to get information regarding limited admission programs from the different colleges and this started a discussion about limited admission and limited retention programs. He said this discussion continued at the February 4 meeting. He said that there is a sort of ambiguity between limited admission and limited retention programs. For example the College of Business has a limited retention program where you have to have a certain grade for a certain class to continue, but for transfer students who come in theyíve been accepted into the program, they come in and find out that they didnít have such a grade and so itís really functionally a limited admission program. K. Van Mol said that art education doesnít have a limited admissions program. She said they donít currently have anything in the front part of the catalog in the section under limited admissions. She said if they are requesting a limited admissions program, then there should be catalog copy for that. E. Seaver said it was their intention for limited admissions because they went through the process of initiating the discussion at the level of the provost as related to resource. He asked K. Van Mol to communicate to them that they need to provide catalog copy for the front section of the catalog.
K. Mills said there was a discussion
at the last UCC meeting about the scenario of the student who becomes
sick at the end of the term, wants an incomplete, and with the withdrawal
policy he has to withdraw from all courses or none. He said that they found
out you can ask for a course load reduction; it could be a medical withdrawal
or it could be a medical reason for reduction of load. It is not
a case of all or none. E. Seaver said that on November 4 the director
of the health center came to the group of advising coordinators of the
colleges and went through those procedures with them.
E. Seaver said there was one action item coming forward from APASC that was approved at the February 4th meeting. He said that because of the strong interest in the university and also because the Provostís Office has established admission numbers for new freshmen and for transfer students for the fall semester, a priority filing deadline for applications has been set for January 12. He said that if your complete application came in after that date, you were put on a waiting list. He said this year we had to move that deadline up to make sure that we did not admit more students than we can handle and this was communicated to the high school counselors very early in the fall semester and again several weeks before the semester break. He said any applications that come in after January 12, with the exception of sponsored admission, will be reviewed but they will be put on a waiting list. He said for the first time we are asking students to send back a confirmation card by May 1st, and then weíll be able to go to the waiting list. He said most of the universities in Illinois have gone to a very early admissions process and ask for a priority filing date in November. He said this proposal is not a change in our admission policies but it is a change in the way in which we will process applications starting a year from now, for Fall 05. He said that it is very important that this go into the catalog so we can communicate this to perspective students. He said the shaded areas on page one, two and three (see attached) is the catalog language that APASC approved for inclusion in the catalog. He said a couple of key things to look at are No. 2, individuals who submit complete applications after November 1 and satisfy minimum admissions criteria will be considered for admission on a competitive basis and notified prior to December 15 as long as space is available. He said that in No. 3 there is actually priority consideration, where those who rank in the top10% of their high school class and have an ACT composite score of at least 19 or SAT of at least 870, or if they rank in the upper third of their high school class and have an ACT composite score of at least 21 of SAT scores of at least 950, they will be given a priority consideration. He said the other thing that is new under No. 4, is that a personal statement is strongly recommended only for students for do not satisfy the priority consideration parameters. He said another thing to look at is the transfer requirement modification to satisfy NIUís competitive transfer GPA of 2.5 for anyone under 60 hours, which was established last year and will be maintained.
E. Seaver suggested having Dan House from Institutional Research come to a meeting to answer questions about the demographics and profile of our students.
MOTION: D. SINASON/D. RUSIN MOVED TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED CATALOG CHANGES REGARDING ADMISSIONS PROCESSING. THE MOTION CARRIED.
GEC - E. Wilkins
On behalf of the GEC, E. Wilkins
moved that the UCC receive the November 20, 2003 minutes and to approve
the deletion of POLS 350 from the general education program. The
E. Wilkins said she had reported on that meeting at the last UCC meeting. K. Van Mol reported that the revisions to the Physics courses that are general education courses were withdrawn at the UCC meeting on December 4. So that supercedes this approval and she wanted the committee to be aware of the fact that those changes are no longer valid.
E. Wilkins said that the minutes of the January 15, 2004 meeting are not yet available. She said that at that meeting the committee looked at a total of 11 course resubmissions, revisions, or interim reports. She said the primary focus was in the area of math and science. She said the committee continued to look at how each course relates to the goals for general education, what assessments are being done, and the assessments currently being carried out. She said just about a year ago at the March 2003 meeting it was noted that POLS 350 was not submitted for resubmission because the faculty member involved decided that it was not worth the extraordinary work involved in the resubmission process. She said at that time no motion was made to remove the course from the general education course list, so at the last meeting it was moved to delete POLS 350 from the general education program. The motion carried.
Honors Committee - L. Rigg
The Honors Committee will not meet until February 6.
CIUE - L. Derscheid
The CIUE will not meet until February 9.
CUAE - C.T. Lin
The CUAE will not meet until February 10. C.T. Lin is not able to attend that meeting; L. Derscheid volunteered to go in his place. Campus safety will be on the agenda and Chief Brady will be speaking.
CUC - D. Gough
The CUC will not meet until February 12.
V. OTHER REPORTS
A. UNIVERSITY ASSESSMENT PANEL ó N. Osorio
N. Osorio said that the UAP met January 16. He said at that meeting they reviewed Career Planning and Placementís assessment plan, and they reviewed some of the instruments that they use, such as the evaluation rubric and the alumni survey.
There was no old business.
J. Stewart said that at the University Senate meeting there was a motion to recommend that we have an expanded grading system. He said there was no consensus as to what the grading system should be, only that we need to go to an expanded grading system of some kind. He said the comment was made that it would probably come to the UCC and to the Graduate School from the University Council. E. Seaver said that it would be referred to the UCC. He asked if this was being developed as something to benefit faculty or students? J. Stewart said it was being presented as being a way of benefitting students because they could effectively wind up with a slightly higher GPA, although it could go both ways.
Meeting Adjourned 1:45 p.m.
Attachment: Memo re: Modification
of Admissions Processing for Fall 2005