University of Minnesota, Morris
Campus Assembly Minutes
April 6, 2000


The Campus Assembly met on Thursday, April 6, 2000, at 4:30 pm in the
Science Auditorium.  

I.  Chancellor Sam Schuman reminded the Assembly of the need to respect
all speakers equally and asked Parliamentarian Roland Guyotte to keep a
watchful eye on correct procedure.  He then mentioned the upcoming visit
of the NCA accreditation site visit team.  Campus community members were
encouraged to share honestly the strengths and weaknesses of UMM.

Schuman reported that the Science Project rose to a higher position on the
slate of legislative requests and passed both the House and the Senate
without any amount reductions.  The conference committee process is not
expected to present any problems since both bodies are in agreement about
the Science Project request.  The next hurdle will be persuading the
governor.  

Finally, Schuman congratulated Horace T. Morse winner Peh Ng and Academic
Staff Award winner Roger McCannon and announced that Jenny Nellis will be
the new Humanities Division Chair.

II.  The minutes of the February 9, 2000 Assembly meeting were approved as
distributed. 

III.  The 2000-2001 Assembly and Adjunct committee rosters were approved
with the following corrections.  Jim Togeas will not serve on the
Scholastic Committee.  Jean Richards will chair that committee and Tracey
Anderson will serve on it as well.  Dimitra Giannuli will serve as the
Dean's Office representative to the Minority Experience Committee.

Schuman thanked the Executive Committee for their hard work staffing the
committees and encouraged the appropriate campus community members to
watch for their preference forms in the spring, complete them thoughtfully
and return them in a timely fashion.

IV.  The proposed slate of Scholars of the College was circulated
electronically on April 4th.  Schuman assured the Assembly that the
Executive Committee is committed to timing Assembly meetings so that
slates may be circulated in hard copy in the future.  

Harold Hinds asked about nominating a 2000 graduate for a 2001 award since
the student hasn't presented yet.  Janet Ahern wondered if the criteria
may need changing since a student of hers hadn't presented yet,
either.  Nat Hart asked if in future the slate could include the total
number nominated; this slate of 26 was culled from 29 nominations.  It was
also requested that the slate be organized by discipline, an idea which
Maggie Dylla reported was considered by the Assembly at the Dec. 6, 1999
meeting and rejected.  Roland Guyotte commented on the number of double
majors and interdisciplinary projects and Schuman encouraged the Functions
and Awards committee to revisit any Assembly concerns.  

Fred Farrell wondered how external individuals are supposed to distinguish
Scholars of the College from Honors graduates and suggested that the
Scholar of the College's area of endeavor therefore be included in the
award (Scholar of the College in BLANK.... and BLANK [if double
majors/interdisciplinary work]).  The proposed slate was approved.

V.  Harold Hinds presented material for a proposed UMM Faculty
Distinguished Research Award on behalf of the Faculty Development
Committee and thanked the absent Joel Eisinger for his efforts.  Hinds
explained that the previous award amount was rejected as being too much
higher than the teaching award.  The award now stands at $1,000 cash or
items of similar value to be arranged through the Finance
Office.  Pieranna Garavaso asked what happened to the course out award
option and Hinds replied that it was discarded because of its high value
(approximately $7,000).  Dimitra Giannuli wondered why research had to be
valued equally with teaching in fiscal terms.  Hinds responded that
getting the award established was seen as more important than the
amount.  Teaching awards generally come early in an academic career while
research awards come later; Hinds acknowledged hoping the amount will
increase eventually.  Schuman reminded the Assembly that the teaching
award is funded by Alumni.

Joe Lee praised the proposed award as long overdue, suggested that its
amount and the teaching award amount might both rise in the future, and
asked how it will be funded.  Schuman responded that the funds will come
from the O&M budget.  Sandy Olson-Loy reminded the Assembly that the
teaching award includes $500 paid to the winner's division.  Bert Ahern
then suggested a friendly amendment increasing the research award to
$1,500.  Lee wondered if the award is strictly for senior faculty and
Schuman suggested that outstanding junior faculty could also receive it.  

Gary Hedin wondered if students could make nominations.  Hinds replied
that they can but explained that they will not be permitted to serve on
the selection committee, which will eventually be comprised of past
winners.  Van Gooch wondered how recipients will selected before there are
any prior winners to form the committee and Schuman explained that initial
selectors might be winners of other faculty awards. 

Matt Senior wondered if there could be two awards, for junior and senior
faculty; the Functions and Awards Committee can explore this possibility
in the future.  Bert Ahern spoke strongly in favor of the award and
suggested that winners should have their status indicated in the bulletin.

There was discussion of whether the research award amount should be an
Assembly action item. Members present were not sure whether or not the
teaching award, which is funded by alumni, was brought before the Assembly
for action or information.  It was suggested that the Assembly endorse the
material handed out at the meeting with the understanding that the
research award should be financially commensurate with the teaching award.  

Greg Thorson suggested the selection process needs broadening.  Genevieve
Gaboriault wondered about the lack of student representation and the rush
to approve the award. Schuman explained that approval was necessary so
that the first award may be bestowed in a timely fashion.  Hinds reminded
the Assembly that the award is long overdue and Schuman suggested
endorsing the proposal in principal with the understanding that the
Functions and Awards Committee will revisit multiple awards and selection
processes.  Dimitra Gianulli protested the idea that the teaching and
research awards needed to be commensurate after which the proposal was
endorsed by the Assembly.

VI.  Jim Olson discussed the Dean's List, which is a UMM award not subject
to the policies of SCEP.  The criteria have been reviewed by multiple
committees.

Simon Chabel suggested that the criteria statement presented was an
attempt to address grade inflation in an inappropriately indirect
fashion.  Olson explained that Sam Schuman had requested an examination of
the criteria because of the large proportion of students achieving Dean's
List status.

Brett Carlson moved to table the issue since it didn't directly address
grade inflation.  His motion was seconded but failed.

Greg Thorson suggested the material lends credibility to grade
inflation. Schuman noted that he recommended that the top 15% of students
receive Dean's List status, which would have been 462 last
semester.  Jenny Nellis added that the Twin Cities uses a GPA of 3.67,
which is an A-, while Schuman wanted 3.75.  

Jerome Hasbargen discouraged acceptance of the material, noting that most
Dakota schools use 3.5 as the GPA for the Dean's List.  It would be
arrogant to be so unfair to future students. Gary Hedin insisted UMM does
not have to do what UMTC does, particularly since our courses are more
rigorous.  Fred Farrell suggested that assertion would be hard to
prove.  Bert Ahern added that grade inflation data is uneven from
discipline to discipline and shouldn't be permitted to impact overall
distinction.  

Schuman suggested the only way to combat grade inflation would be to
impose a grade percentage rule on faculty (i.e. only 10% get As, for
example).  Mollie Jo Poehlman wondered if data is available tracking
Dean's List awards by division and Schuman acknowledged a historical trend
of higher grades in certain courses but insisted the trend is not extreme. 

Thorson asked why we're changing horses midstream... if there are too many
students on the list, the problem is grade inflation, and if grade
inflation is a problem, there are other ways to address it.

Dave Roberts suggested that Humanities and Education are the divisions
with substantially higher grades and Loreen Olson suggested two award
lists, Dean's (at 3.5 GPA) and Chancellor's (at 3.8 GPA). 

Jim Olson noted that grade inflation did not enter into the discussion of
the Dean's List at either the Scholastic or Functions/Awards
committees.  Other issues were thoroughly discussed and the proposal was
approved.  Amanda Wobbema countered that she did bring up the inflation
issue at Scholastic Committee but Schuman suggested not debating that
issue now. Clare Strand explained that the Dean's List issue was raised by
a senate policy changed and Angela Bos suggested waiting to see how things
settled.  Mike Miller added that we have lots of good students at UMM and
we shouldn't penalize them by tweaking the GPA requirements.  

Nat Hart reminded the Assembly that before we added plusses and minuses to
the grading system, it was impossible to achieve a 3.5 GPA without getting
As.  Now you can.  If you add plusses to the grading process, it makes
sense to raise the fence on GPA requirements for Dean's List honors.  Fred
Farrell reminded the Assembly of the differences between how students
compare internally and externally and Roland Guyotte encouraged finishing
up with this item.  Simon Chabel moved to table and was seconded.  A tie
vote kept the item before the Assembly and Bert Ahern called the
question.  The proposal was approved 29 votes to 28.

VII.  The following material from the Curriculum Committee was approved:

		o ElEd/SecEd - Psy 1051 added req.
		o GER for Anth 2404, Anth 2405, Biol 4001, Biol 4002, Econ
3002, Hum 1054.
		o Hist 3152H (new)
		o Th 3001 (Intersession)
		o Two Phil Forms C
		o Form A, 8 Forms C - Music
	o Mus 1042 term/offering change 

VIII.  The spring semester calendar item was tabled at Harold Hinds'
suggestion due to dwindling attendance, after which the Assembly
adjourned.

Respectfully submitted by
Rebecca Webb