Skip to Main Navigation | Skip to Content




Academic Affairs / Provost

Administration 203
Warrensburg, MO 64093
Phone: 660-543-4116





 ACADEMIC COUNCIL

Tuesday, December 9, 2014

Chairs and Provost: 3:30

Deans and Administrators to Arrive: 4:00

Union 237A  

The Academic Council functions as the primary organizational group for department chairs and deans. The Council functions in an advisory capacity to the Provost/Chief Learning Officer for Academic Affairs. The Council recommends actions to the Provost who either responds or directs the recommendations to the proper person or organization within the university governance structure. These recommendations will indicate the Council's majority opinion on an issue or a call for action. The recommendations will be in writing and will contain the appropriate individual or group to receive the recommendation. 

I.             Approval of Minutes from November 11, 2014

  • Motion to approve by Scott Lubaroff
  • Seconded by Mick Luehrman
  • Unanimously approved.

II.           Department Chair Discussion with Provost (3:30 - 4:00)

A. Space Utilization

  • Previously, there was a committee that reviewed requests for space needs; committee would make recommendations. There is currently no opportunity for Chairs to give input on how space is used and some departments have had spaces taken away from them.
  • This campus doesn’t have a way to classify space and nobody is currently working on solving the problem of space utilization, but that is an eventual goal of 25Live; however, the rollout of 25Live has been problematic.
  • Across campus, there is a question of organizational or departmental “ownership” of space.
    • Space is not being lent to other organizations, even when the space is not being used.
    • Not all space can be claimed on campus. We need an ongoing opportunity to make sure that we are maximizing our space at all times.
    • One option is to level spaces on campus. (e.g. 100 level is open use, 200 level requires departmental permission, etc.) Would also show who is responsible for room upkeep.
  • We may need to assemble another Space Utilization Committee, perhaps named differently.
    • One suggestion was for the committee to include at least one Chair from each college.
    • Another suggestions was that the committed needs a representative from each building, which is perhaps more important than representatives from each college.
    • Chairs would like to be notified if space in their area is being reclassified or available.
  • This process will include more than just academic departments, because 25Live will include every room in every building, even GSB. 
  • Campus has over 140 computer labs, although that number may include classrooms and labs.
    • Perhaps 25Live could be capable of showing how frequently a lab is accessed by students. Card readers could require students to swipe attendance at labs.
  • Provost Curtis will start the space utilization conversation with the President.
    • If you have opinions on how Hudson Hall can be used, please contact Provost Curtis.

                             

B: Counseling Services for Faculty

  • The Counseling Center on campus serves students, but the Employee Assistance Program, which only provides a phone number, is currently the only service for faculty or staff.
  • Dr. Tenbus will get clarification on Counseling Center services for future discussion.

III.          Questions regarding written reports

               No written reports were submitted.

IV.          Information Items 

               A.TK20 (Brian Long)

  • There is currently no campus wide tool to use information above the individual program level. HLC suggested that the university consider a campus wide assessment system.
  • TK20 assessment software has been purchased to assist with collection of data for evaluation.
    • TK20 is a better tool for working with data, because information is reported to a single place; no more saving data in filing cabinets or on faculty computers.
    • Can upload student work and tag it for multiple purposes (e.g. HLC accreditation, external disciplinary, department reports, etc.)
    • The focus for this software is student assessment, not to replace Blackboard.
  • Software will initially be implemented with the College of Education, because their current assessment design is similar to what the software expects and they are about to go through reaccreditation.
    • College of Education will discover how to upload past information, because they have to show 5 years of information for accreditation.
    • System can archives unlimited years of data, but initial focus is current information.
  • Features will be introduced to the University in sequential fashion.
    • The rollout schedule can be flexible, so contact the college assessment coordinator if you have questions or suggestions.
    • Information uploading can begin by the end of the spring 2015, if you are ready.
    • Software to reach everywhere on campus by fall 2016. You will not be expected to work with TK20 until you receive full training and are comfortable with the process.
  • Software can support students uploading documents, but that would only be available for select programs that have need and ability. It would involve more features, including student passwords, IDs, and faith that students can correctly use the process.
  • Student artifacts and assessment data  can be submitted in whatever format the department chooses and reports can be customized.
  • The question of TK20 accommodating peer evaluations has not been discussed with the company yet, but tentatively, it is a possibility.
    • Would involve permission levels. Students would need to be identified as evaluators for an artifact.
    • Some programs would like students to be able to look at previous peer evaluations to see how they have changed.
  • P&T tentatively has the potential to go digital, but academic programming is first priority. 
  • Provost’s office is paying for the software, even though the company’s preferred method is to charge students.              
  • Not up and running yet, but initial banner data will be uploaded in January. 

  • Office of Technology Update (handout)
  • Argos is ready for Apple users. Details are provided in the handout.
  • Because of the rising price of Adobe, OT is looking for suggestions for alternatives.
  • Need to purchase new licensing in the next year; Adobe renewal is this time next year.
    • OT will gather information on alternatives and share with Academic Council.
    • Email suggestions to Jim Graham. Faculty will be informed as decisions are made.
  • Our current Adobe license gives us access to current versions, but not creative cloud.
  • One concern is that Adobe is an industry standard, which means that students should be prepared for what they will use in the workforce.
  • Currently, OT pays for Adobe software.
    • One option is to charge only programs who use Adobe.
    • Adobe does not yet have a pricing model for individual student licensing.
    • Adobe claims there could be a Missouri consortium in the future.
  • With everybody going wireless, can our network support cloud based software?
    • More usage of the cloud creates bandwidth issues.
    • University is working to upgrade from 1 GB to 5GB
  • Record number of tests given online is not necessarily a good thing. Strive for authentic assessment.
    • Even with a growing number of online classes, tests do not need to be multiple choice.
    • Some colleges are not allowed to give online finals.
  • OT is working to deploy more devices and support them successfully.

V.           Discussion Items

A.OAS (Barbara Mayfield)

  • Thanks to faculty and staff, students are not afraid to declare disabilities. Approaching 800 students, which is higher than other universities.
  • Many OAS students have good employment success, so image of OAS is changing.
  • Liability concerns about medical accommodations.
    • Faculty are told not to call EMS for a seizure, but to call a different number.
    • Faculty do not feel qualified to make medical decisions and are afraid of a lawsuit.
    • Legal counsel can answer questions about defending faculty in a court of law.
    • Students are aware of their health and requested not to call EMS, not OAS. Perhaps change wording to say that the student made the decision and it is not OAS policy.
    • Call 911 if you feel you should. Public safety (543-4123) will respond faster on campus than 911. Dialing 911 from a campus phone will reach public safety. 
  • Concerns were presented that some students will not be able to participate in the career field of their selected major, due to their disabilities.
    • University cannot prevent a student from a selected major. It is the student’s choice.
    • In the classroom, faculty cannot require students to be able to perform all essential functions of the job field.
    • Law says that if the student can perform the job with reasonable accommodation, disability does not need to be disclosed. If beyond reasonable accommodations are needed, we need to talk to student about the realities of the selected career.
    • OAS may be able to speak with students more frankly than faculty members, so feel free to refer students to OAS about the realities selecting a major.
  • Faculty want to be sensitive to OAS students, but not over accommodating; however, ambiguity poses a problem.
    • OAS does not request faculty members to make up lost teaching for student absences.
    • Students must manage their own missed work in a timely manner. OAS is glad to proctor makeup exams.
    • Students needing extra time should be given extra on timed tests, but do not need to be given extra days on tests that are open for multiple days.
    • If student has missed so much that essential elements of the course cannot be met, the student might need to take a U or rethink his or her plan. 
  • OAS asks faculty to announce the need for notetakers at least a couple times in class, but sometimes notetakers do not volunteer.
    • Paying notetakers would allow selection to make sure notetaker is a good student.
    • OAS has no budget to pay notetakers. Most campuses don’t pay notetakers, because there is no way to evaluate performance.
    • Faculty can announce that OAS, not the faculty member, is requesting the notetaker. OAS can also come to the classroom to make the presentation.
    • OAS can offer a certificate of volunteer hours, which gives 48 hours of volunteer time for a 3 credit hour class.
  • For online classes and assignments, material must be accessible (e.g. closed captioning or a script for deaf students).

VI.          Action Item

                

VII.         Future Agenda Items

A. Admission standards, enrollment targets,  and quality of students

B. OP pay parity

Thank you to Dean Michael Wright and the College of Education for providing the snacks and refreshments for our meeting today

MEETING SCHEDULE

                                                           

Remaining Schedule for  2014-2015

January 13 2015 3:30 Union 237B

February 10 2015 3:30 Union 237B

March 10 2015 3:30 Union 238

April 14 2015 3:30 Union 237B

May 12 2015 3:00 * Union 237A

June 9 2015 3:00 * WDE 2401