Graduate Council

Voting members present: Bill Bogley, Jim Coakley, Ryan Contreras, Cass Dykeman (via phone), Lisa Ganio, Claire Gibbons, Marie Harvey, Lisa Price (via phone), George Waldbusser
Voting members absent: Sourabh Apte, Pat Chappell, Theresa Filtz
Ex-Officio members present: Graduate School – Stephanie Bernell, Jennifer Brown (via phone), OSU Cascades – Julie Gess-Newsome (via phone)
Guests present: Rosemary Garagnani, Dorthe Wildenschild

Grading Rubric from M.Eng. – Dorthe Wildenschild

• The attachment is the minimum for the baseline assessment; some programs will tie in closer to the Graduate Learning Outcomes (GLO). This is an experiment – a document in progress. Portfolio assessments are linked to the outcomes. Language is being developed for each portfolio requirement that qualifies for satisfactory, unsatisfactory and exemplary performance. Dorthe felt that, perhaps, it should tie to the GLOs.
• Ethics only has two columns – one is either ethical or not.
• There will be a course evaluation.
• Request whether a summative assessment is better than the final oral exam.
• Will follow-up occur after students graduate? Dorthe responded that a follow-up can occur during the exit interview and after two years.
• What happens if the assessment is not meet? Students will not graduate.
• If they did not satisfactorily meet the elements for coursework preparation, they can meet GLO2.
• One noted that, in the College of Business, if the student does not meet all of the requirements, the student is required to take an oral exam.
  • They can make the ‘did not meet’ change. Would it be preferable for resubmission of the portfolio or for the student to take an oral exam? Dorthe felt that, since students will receive a lot of assistance, it is unlikely that they will not meet the portfolio requirements.
  • Would they retake the class? Dorthe was unsure since it would require the student to complete an additional term. If the student is international, it may make sense for the student to take an oral exam.
• Dorthe clarified that she was talking about the four portfolio elements and not the Graduate Learning Outcomes.
• Regarding project highlights, could it be something done outside of the course? Dorthe responded yes, but unlikely, since they will also be in the new professional development for engineer’s course, and she expects them to incorporate elements from that course.

Confirm Fall Program Review Assignments

1. 10-year Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences
   1. Theresa Filtz
   2. Kok-Mun Ng
2. 10-year Marine Resource Management
   1. Marie Harvey
   2. Matt Campbell
3. 5-year Comparative Health Sciences
   1. Lisa Ganio
   2. Josh Stewart

Discussion of Roles and Responsibilities of Graduate Council in Reviewing Proposals

• There is no rubric regarding role; the role is squishy.
• One observed that faculty come with their own lenses from their disciplines – all disciplines are different. Hard to create a set of rules to apply across all disciplines. One liked that the Graduate Council is a sounding board – the members can apply common sense to OSU.
• The shared governance model allows the Graduate Council to review and approve programs at the discretion of the members.
• One noted that the question is not unique to the Graduate Council; the Curriculum Council wrestles with what elements makes an upper division course. A course should not be both upper and lower division.
• In reference to the previous review of the Applied Ethics – MA, MS, one felt that it seems peculiar in Liberal Arts to have a humanities degree without a language component.
  • Regarding a definition, one of the Applied Ethics representatives indicated that, if it has something to do with science, it should be a science degree; the Council member felt the proposal should have been an MA.
  • Undergraduate degrees have core requirements, but an MS has no standardized core.
  • Previously the discussion has been if it’s an MS, it’s thesis based. If an MS does not fit the model, does the Council make the program change the degree type? Ryan responded negatively, but indicated that if the proposal comes back, the Council can require inclusion of Graduate Learning Outcomes.
  • The broader concern for an MA is that the language component is what differentiates an MA from an MS in the catalog. Is defining an MA and MS a Graduate Council function?
  • One felt that the Council received more of an option proposal than a full degree proposal. Because the proposal allows one to change from an MA to MS in the last term is problematic; if the proposal had indicated that one must identify an MA or MS when admitted, it would have been different.
  • There should be some differentiation on paper, so an employer, and the students, can determine the difference. Is there a way to have MA and MS requirements?
  • There is a reason why one would want an MS; rigorous research should be part of an MS. The MA and MS are distinguished by what a student is preparing to do.

Action: Fall term action item – Consider separate Learning Outcomes for MA and MS degrees.

Revisiting Certificates and Double Counting

• Ryan asked the Graduate Council members to think about the issue of double-counting credits for certificates, and how their units handle it – this will be an action item for Fall term.
• Many masters programs are asking whether students can double-count credits for credentials.
• An example is the MNR, which is a completely online non-thesis program, but a capstone is required.
• Rosemary noted that some programs want to double-count an entire earned certificate. She has also seen a model where transfer credits from a certificate are treated differently than other credits.
• The policy refers to ‘external’, but is determined by what ‘external’ means.
• What is meant by residency? Courses taken once enrolled in the program.
• Rosemary stated that there must be 30 distinct credits on a master’s degree; it is more difficult when earning the higher degree first. She favors looking at concurrent certificates differently than other programs.
• Some programs use a certificate to determine how one would do in a master’s program.
• One noted that, at one time, there was a proposal for UO, OSU and PSU to stack certificates to achieve a master’s degree; however, OSU did not participate due to their residency requirement. Stackable certificates are becoming more common.

Action: Fall term action item – develop a policy for double counting coursework for certificates, degrees and that references minors and options.

MBA in Marketing – Change Graduate Option –#104025

• Proposal for MBA in Marketing
• Jim explained that the MBA degree’s Core I is traditional with 15 credits; Core 2 has 27 credits, which is typical in an MBA program; and it has an additional 18 credits of specialized marketing coursework. Previously it had a 24-credit option that focused on Market Research, which is changing to an 18-credit option with an emphasis on Digital Marketing applications. The total credits decreased from 65 to 60.

Action: Marie moved to approve the Marketing proposal; motion seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.

MBA in Human Resource Management – New Graduate Option – #103711

• Proposal for MBA in Human Resource Management
• Jim explained that the College of Business is adding an 18-credit specialization in Human Resource Management, and one new graduate course was added.
• One Council member expressed concern that three of the required five courses are slash. Jim responded that there are 9 slash courses out of 65 total credits.
  • Another noted that enrollment numbers in some courses are too low to not have slash courses.

Action: Marie moved to accept the MBA in Human Resource Management Graduate Option; motion seconded and passed with one dissenting vote.

College of Education Waiver Request to Extend the Deadline for Submission of the Program of Study for Three Terms for Part-time Ph.D Students

• The waiver does not request any substantive changes. The waiver would involve 8-10 students, at the most.
• Cass explained that part-time students (professional educators) need additional time to have a program of study approved.
• Jennifer understands why PhD faculty would want this waiver. She wants to make sure that part-time students won’t fall through the cracks – how to ensure that over time they are taken care of?
  • One Council member has always wondered why the policy indicates ‘terms’ and not 60 credits. If it reads as ‘60 credits’, the part-time students are covered.
  • Steph cautioned that this change has ramifications for the enrollment management group.
  • One questioned how much flexibility is in this program in terms of coursework.
    • Cass asked the same question. He noted there is a lot of individual tailoring, for example, whether a one uses a qualitative or quantitative research methodology. Students need time to learn where they want to go with research.
    • One questioned whether there is a way to find the middle ground. Cass thought this could be accomplished by assigning the major professor during the first quarter.
  • This is a request for a waiver under a policy, but the Graduate Council does not grant waivers, but the Graduate School does grant waivers.
  • Rosemary noted that this is different since the request is for an exception for an entire program rather than for a student. Cass noted that the waiver would only apply to the part-time students. The College of Education would need to provide the Graduate School with a list of affected students each term to avoid unduly placing holds.
  • How many credits of coursework will students accomplish in those terms? Cass responded that students should have 18-22 credits by the end of the 8^th term. Students will still need about 38 additional credits.
  • Proposed amendments:
    • The program of study for part-time students would not be due until the end of the 8^th term;
    • The major professor shall be assigned by the 2^nd quarter of enrollment;
    • A list of all current part-time students and their major professor shall be submitted to the Graduate School each term;
    • This is a provisional two-year approval and shall be reconsidered by the Graduate Council next year; and
    • The provisional approval shall be fully reconsidered as full approval in two years.
  • Cass noted that the students are all working full-time, and they are predominantly ESL teachers.

Action: Jim moved to approve College of Education’s Waiver Request, as amended; motion seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.

Co-Chairs Report

• Ergonomics submitted the requested information and Ryan approved the proposal.
• Ryan hoped that GC members would consider moving Cat II proposals forward during the summer, based on their appointments.

Matters Arising

• The farewell celebration for Jennifer is on June 7 from 3:30-5:00; her last day is July 13.
• Steph Bernell was congratulated on her appointment as interim Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School.
• This was the last meeting of Spring term.

Minutes prepared by Vickie Nunnemaker, Faculty Senate staff