November 14, 2006


1. CALL TO ORDER:  The sixth meeting of the Faculty Senate for 2006-2007 was called to order at 1:15 PM on November 14 in Jacobus Lounge, Brockway Hall by Chair Melvyn King.



D. Berger, R. Spitzer, K. Lawrnece, L. Anderson, J. Governali, J. Hendrick, J. Rayle,

J. Mosher, D. Sidebottom, V. Marty, B. Tobin, D. Ritchie , S. VanEtten, J. Walkuski,

P. Schroeder, C. Schacht, K. Boyes, M. Scala, E. Davis-Russell, R. Franco, R. Peagler, W. Shaut, J. Cottone, G. Clarke, D. Kreh, M. Connell


SENATORS AND MEMBERS ABSENT: I. Jubran, D. M. Miller, P. Quaglio ,

G. Zarate, D. West, J. Casciani, E. Jampole, J. Sitterly, M. Ware(class conflict fall 2006), B. Schuster, E. Bitterbaum


GUESTS PRESENT: I. Jubran, D. M. Miller, P. Quaglio, G. Zarate, D. west, J. Casciani, E. Jampole, J. Sitterly, M. Ware(class conflict fall 2006), B. Schecter, E. Bitterbaum



The Minutes from October 31, 2006 were approved.



There was a vote by acclamation to congratulate the SUNY Cortland Red Dragon football team and student body for their victory and show of sportsmanship at the Cortaca Jug football game on Saturday (Passed)



The chair reported that a call for nominations on the University Police Advisory Board has been put forth.  Chairman King further stated that the list of names will then be forwarded to the President to select appointees for that committee.



K. Alwes - No report.



E. McCabe � No report.   



Treasurer D. Berger announced that he will be conducting the call for the ten dollar Senate dues shortly to replenish the Senate account.





E. Davis-Russell reported for the President who is away in California visiting alums.  The Provost announced that President Bitterbaum expressed his regrets at not being able to attend the meeting. 


The next item of business the Provost reported on was that Dr. Steve Hunt, who will be stepping down as chair of the College Council due to a recent appointment by the Governor to serve on the Board of Trustees, was recognized by the College last Saturday. 


Provost Davis-Russell mentioned the recent notice indicating that Dr. Rea of International Programs has been reassigned.  The Provost reported that the campus will be conducting a search for a new Director and the Faculty Senate will be participating in the process. Davis-Russell indicated that in the interim she will be sending out a notice shortly calling for interested parties to submit their letters of interest to serve as Interim Director until a new director is appointed.  Provost Davis-Russell reported that currently she has received four unsolicited letters as statements of interest and a small committee will be constituted to review the process.  She further reported that since Liz McCartney, Assistant Director of International Programs, is leaving in December there will also be a need to appoint an Interim Assistant Director.


Chairman King asked the Provost if she wanted to report on an item of business left over from the last meeting due to time considerations, and the Provost responded in the affirmative.


Provost Davis-Russell reported that she met with Ray Franco in his position of Vice President of Student Affairs along with both their respective cabinets regarding students who are under-represented on campus. As a result Dr. Franco and Provost Davis-Russell�s cabinets met, the first meeting directed at addressing questions trying to ascertain how we can best serve our students.  She said that initiative was conducted to take a look at students who are underrepresented on campus. As an outcome, Dr. Davis-Russell met with students over the semester including those in the Black Student Union, Lafamilia Latina, and listened to some of the challenges that face Cortland looking for feedback as to those student�s perspectives. John Sosa from Sociology/Anthropology also conducted a study with those individuals and collected information in a more systematic fashion. Sean VanEtten was also asked to send out a survey to participants and there was quite a bit of collaboration between Sosa�s input and what was collected in the survey. Davis Russell said, �In essence there was a confluence of things and one was that one of the reports that I have read over the last 15 or 20 years raised some of the same issues that have been raised currently.  Dr. Franco worked with John Sosa to develop a response for actual solutions to some of the problems. We then met as a small group to go over the proposals. We had a retreat on campus, and invited a number of faculty from across the campus and some staff from various departments to participate. The proposal in front of you is a result of all of those collaboratives.  With Dr. Franco�s move to Institutional Advancement, Rich Peagler and I have worked together with Paula Warnken offering additional amendments to this proposal. We shared this with the President�s Cabinet and had a discussion there and their endorsement, and we shared it with the Multi Cultural and Gender Studies Council and had their input. We are bringing this to share with you. Our goal is to have a structure that is representative of the entire college.  So when you look at the entire council each of the divisions of the college is represented in view of the President�s Office.�  Davis-Russell indicated that questions raised during the course of the discussion included whether this doesn�t this negate the faculty�s participation, saying, �The answer is, no it doesn�t.  The answer is, since there are a limited number of seats on the council faculty can serve on any one of the committees that are represented here.� Dr. Davis-Russell also reported that another question that some of the people have misunderstood is regarding curriculum and they want to know if there is an attempt at creating an autonomous curriculum committee. The Provost stated,  �The answer is no.�  She stated that curriculum issues still have to go through the curriculum process.  She said,  �So the undergraduate curriculum will go through the all-college curriculum process. If it�s graduate curriculum it will have to go through the GFCC (Graduate Faculty Curriculum Committee.)�  Provost Davis-Russell ended by concluding that those are some of the issues and she asked for questions from the floor to be directed to herself as well as Vice Presidents Franco and Peagler.


M. King asked the Provost, �Is there something you want the Senate to do with this?�


Provost Davis-Russell replied, �We want the Senate�s endorsement. We think that as an institution even though we have for a long time espoused values, there are populations of students who fall through the cracks. There are issues that we have not sufficiently addressed, and so we see this as one way to address those issues. And so we would like faculty�s support to endorse this.�


K. Alwes said,  �I raise the question as the committee is under construction will many of the existing committees be reconstituted? Will there be a new constitution or will membership will be reconstituted? What is exactly is mandated?�


Provost Davis-Russell responded, �Some of the existing committees may not be functional at this point and so it is bringing new life back into the committees. For example, the Multicultural Resource Team, as we talk to the students, students know absolutely nothing about this. The students are under represented.  Students do not know how to navigate the campus and get the kind of help they need. The Multi-Cultural Resource team serves to address some of the immediate needs, and yet they do absolutely nothing about it. So, reconstitution would mean making that committee much more visible and having its activities widely publicized across campus.�


R. Franco said, �Another example would be the Community Relations Committee. That really becomes a standing committee that heretofore has been an ad hoc committee to address concerns in the community when there is a problem that handles a specific problem. An example is we had an ad hoc group meeting last year to try to come up with strategies between students and law enforcement.� Dr. Franco further stated that when this committee is reconstituted this group would be a standing body that would meet on a regular basis to address such issues. 


K. Alwes added, �And correct the injustice in the meantime.�


M. King said, �Let me make a procedural comment here. This is being reported out today so this is the appropriate day to ask questions and the Senate will discuss in next meeting.�


R. Peagler said, �I will defer to Ray on this but you might mention the JC Penney�s incident and what happened in May, it sounded like I wasn�t real clear at the administrative conference at what transpired during that particular incident, but when you talk about the College Community Committee it might be something that could be addressed in that particular venue.�


R. Franco stated, "Again what Rich is talking about is an incident that took place last May at the local Penney�s department store it was pretty obvious that employees were responding or reacting to the presence of three African American students without any apparent reason and responding as if to imply there was a problem with those students being in the store and we responded to that. This would be a committee that would look at that and try to develop broader focus and maybe address all internal agencies in the community.�


D. Ritchie asked what the relationship would be between the Multi-Cultural and Gender Studies Council and the one discussed in the proposal. He asked if the Multi-Cultural and Gender Studies Council would have a supervisory role to the coordinators.


R. Franco responded that the coordinators would be supervised by the Vice President of Student Affairs and that one important function of the coordinators is to play a very active role in the life of the council with the Vice President of Student Affairs over it.  She clarified that the coordinators would take leadership roles but will not be supervised but rather interface with the council, saying �Ultimately the council itself will make decisions that will impact the lives of the coordinators� but not in an employee relationship.�


The Provost added, � The Multi- Cultural and Gender Studies Council itself attests to the fact that there are some things that it has done well, and others that it hasn�t done as well. As we take a broader look across campus this is an attempt to say how can we do things better that are not being done so well. All things academic will still remain in the Multi-Cultural and Gender Studies area but it is not being subsumed here at all. There are some committees, for example, the Student Support Committee that has not been functional over the last four or five years.  That committee will be subsumed under this council. And the MGS will have a discussion about what its focus will be, and what will emerge during their discussions is a focus on the Multi-Cultural and Gender Studies Council, issues such as research and providing research as an arena for research in these areas and other types of things. The oversight for multi-cultural life outside of the arena of academic issues will be the province of this committee.�


D. Ritchie said, �I see that this council also has its charge.�


M. Scala asked if the coordinators are going to be highly involved in the process and would it be mandated that they be on the committee?


R. Franco responded that it doesn�t make sense for people to be involved whose function is to be involved with multi-cultural issues to not directly be involved with the council.


M. Scala asked, �Is there going to be any student representation on that committee?  Are they going to be involved in the process?�


R. Franco responded, �We don�t proscribe who those Vice Presidents appoint and we did that on purpose.� Franco further stated that any of the Vice Presidents could appoint students and the Vice President of Student Affairs would certainly appoint somebody. 


D. Ritchie said, � I saw that the Multi-Cultural Life council does have responsibility for dealing with academic strategic affairs goals so it comes into the academic area.�


Provost Davis-Russell said, �You have to understand that Academic Affairs is constituted of academic programs and academic support programs.  The goal that is mentioned, Goal Number 2�when Academic Affairs developed its strategic plan, those goals, if you look at them, are a part of reaching across the campus. When we talked about creating a culturally confident campus that doesn�t mean that it is restricted to Academic Affairs but to the entire campus. So in doing what we need to do to meet the goals and objectives, it makes no sense to work in isolation and I think you can recognize the need to work collaboratively with student affairs so that the whole life of the student is involved in the process.�


M. King said, �When you mention things about the students who are unaware of resources available to them, is this a particular indictment of the COR system?�


Provost Davis-Russell asked for clarification if the Chair meant COR 101.


M. King responded, �They�re not doing their job as well because there are students walking around unaware of resources?�


Provost Davis-Russell responded, �I am not indicting the COR 101 system. I think if I can ask you to take a journey, just a brief journey out of your shoes into the shoes of a student of color. You�ve heard it in COR 101, but in coming to an area that is very foreign to where you come from; many of our students are the first generation of college students, so even in COR 101 you visited the Office of the President and Provost and what not when you have a problem it�s a whole different experience to have access to who�s available to help you on that level.  This is not to indict or supplant COR, it�s meant to compliment what else is going on.�


M. Scala said, �The COR process�part of their curriculum is to incorporate things like that�incorporate multi-cultural aspects of the program into the curriculum�Students are required to write papers on specified areas of the course, and in one of the areas with our peers we do multi-cultural programming which is incorporated in the program. So, it is out there.�


K. Alwes said, �When you were thinking about this I know Ray suggested regarding the student representation, did you have any idea of what type of representation you were seeking? What positions and what level of people on campus, or even from the town, do you have any idea of who these people are that are going to be making up this committee?�


R. Franco stated, �I want to make sure everybody understands, the Council we are talking about, there would not be exclusive membership on any of these committees, that�s the way I talk about. This is a leadership council and in order to have representation on each of these committees it will require a number of people across campus, two separate groups. There might be 60 people on various committees and we might have 2-3 students on every committee, that�s very, very possible. As far as membership to the council itself I would be looking at leaders on campus, looking at the SGA President or Vice President, people on the director level, at least in my area of Student Affairs, I won�t speak for Elizabeth, but Bill might have an Associate or Director of HR, someone who would have influence college wide and have more perspective on the table to deal with. There will be representation on the council, and there is representation on the committees.�


K. Alwes responded, �I realize that.�


R. Franco said, �As far as the city goes, I wouldn�t have a problem perhaps with the Mayor or Chief of Police, any city administrator or higher level of administration in the city.   Maybe someone from the business partnership who could have influence with the stores downtown that interact with the students.�


Provost Davis-Russell said, �I think that given that I have to select; Academic Affairs is comprised of many, many different areas and so I would want faculty representation and we would want representation from other areas such as Admissions and Enrollment Management, and from some of the other areas represented under Academic Affairs. Because in order to address some of the objectives here it is a broad spectrum of people so, as David mentioned, the Academic Affairs Strategic Plan, when we talk about the diversity of students, we talk about Enrollment Management as well as faculty.�


B. Tobin asked, �Has it already been discussed or considered as far as number 4, retention of students, representation from athletics?�


Provost Davis-Russell responded, �Athletics is part of Academic Affairs and so I assume it would have representation on the committee.�


K. Lawrence asked, �For clarification this would be the multi-cultural Life Council. Would it take the place of the Multi-Cultural and Gender Studies Council?  Would it not address gender or issues of sexual orientation? I just very briefly read the description. Is that right?�


The Provost responded, �That is correct.  The multi-cultural and women�s studies issues would remain part of Multi-Cultural and Gender Studies.  That is not in any way being supervised by this group.�


K. Lawrence said, �You mentioned there was discussion with the MGS about this proposal and you indicated that there hasn�t been, at least in the area of you student support; the committee has not accomplished as much there in last five years as you would hope. I was wondering is there going to be any review or examination in terms of leadership and in terms of what has taken place there in MGS in last five years?�


Provost Davis-Russell said, �There is an annual review of leadership.�


J. Governali asked, �When you talk about sexual orientation in the multi-cultural life proposal, what happens to this proposal?  When the proposal comes to the Faculty Senate and it comes for revision and is amended, how do we deal with this the next time we look at it and it comes to the floor?�


M. King replied,  �We can pretty much do as we want but it�s the Provost�s proposal. I guess the option is to endorse or not endorse it.�


The Provost said, �Just to clarify, you will see several dates, points have been raised that have been incorporated, there are ideas about how to proceed. This is a campus initiative, it�s not the Provost�s. The Provost and Vice President of Student Affairs and I did come together to collaborate but this is a campus mission.  But in order to be successful it means that all of us as campus will have to work together.�


R. Spitzer said, �Point of Order, Mr. Chairman, I think the proper procedure is to recognize those who haven�t spoken.�


M. King said, �I stand corrected.�


R. Spitzer said, �Just a procedural point, I don�t think it would really make sense as to the document in any respect offer specific amendments to wording. It felt like a draft proposal as I take it, but if anyone has separate or standing motions that could be voted on at same time, that would be the way to proceed.�


M. Scala said that he felt that it was great that there were people included such as African Americans, but added by saying, �But the title multi-cultural, in essence, really incorporates all cultures. You can�t exclude all students.  We have to bridge that gap and find out what are some measures to do that.  There are 7,000 students on campus, and in essence, we are all multi-cultural and we have to bridge that gap.


Provost Davis-Russell said, �That�s a very good point, Mike. If you look at the Academic Affairs Strategic Plan the goal consists of making the campus more culturally competent. To do that it doesn�t mean addressing only isolated populations, it means addressing the whole campus. And so for all students there is a focus on that. So, if you look at the kinds of programming developed through the council, which means whole coordinators have responsibility that addresses all populations of students not just these we have been talking about.�


M. Scala said, �Shouldn�t that be in proposal then?�


The Provost responded, �It is.�


D. Ritchie said, �If I could just make a suggestion, since there have been several comments regarding the Multi-cultural and Gender Studies Council, I think this document should also reflect its relationship with that other very important council that deals with similar issues on campus. I think it would be really helpful for people trying to get a sense of what this document deals with and  since it reflects  another agency on campus and seems to have a similar name and similar responsibilities, think it would just be helpful to have that clarified in this document.�


M. King brought the discussion to a close due to time constraints, asked the senators take the proposal back to constituents for comments and bring this up for consideration at the next meeting where it can be discussed and voted on along with any specific motions that may generate out of it.  He also encouraged anyone to bring related issues to the Steering Committee.




Long Range Planning Committee � D. Ritchie reported that his committee is looking at the Student Affairs Strategic Plan and a response to that. They are also starting to take a look at the Senate charge, both for the purpose of the governance structure review and also because part of the committee�s charge is in the handbook. Ritchie also indicated that the LRPC is also looking at the process with each Vice President submitting their individual Strategic plan to the campus. The LRPC has been charged with looking at that and responding to it, Ritchie reported, mentioning the five year strategic plans and looking at what the signposts indicate needs to be looked at again.


Educational Policy Committee � J. Cottone, Chair � No report {SEE New Business}


Student Affairs Committee � M. Connell, no report.


Faculty Affairs Committee � G. Clarke, Chair �  Clarke reported that the Faculty Affairs Committee has met several times regarding departmental policies and is in the process of looking at the Senate�s charge. He indicated that his committee has a student vacancy due to a class conflict from the previous student member.


College Research Committee � No report.


General Education Committee � M. McGuire, Chair � McGuire reported that her committee is starting the process of reviewing courses included in each of GE categories which is a 3 year process. They have formed sub committees related to each GE category and are sending out letters to department chairs asking that they look at the objectives for the GE categories within their departments, and respond if courses continue to meet those GE requirements, and whether or not departments choose to keep course in the categories, and they will be looking at syllabi for faculty teaching GE courses. 


Committee on CommitteesJ. Barry, Chair � E. McCabe gave the following report: The Committee on Committees has re-issued a call for nominations for a committee to conduct a Review of the Governance Structure.  This new call was based on the revised committee structure.  The nomination deadline is today at 4:00 p.m.  Nominations received are:


1.  Two representatives from Arts & Sciences � Howard Botwinick, Randi Storch, Donna West (Lori Ellis withdrew); 2.  Two representative from Education -   Andrea Lachance, Joseph Rayle (Bill Buxton withdrew); 3.  Two representative from Professional Studies � Kath Howarth, Jeff Walkuski, Susan Wilson; 4.  Two representative from Professional Staff - Glen Clarke; 5.  One librarian � Ellen McCabe (Mark Connell withdrew); 6.  Virginia Levine - Executive Assistant to the President

According to the Handbook, �A committee shall be elected by the Faculty Senate from nominees prepared by the Committee on Committees.�



J. Cottone opened up the Old Business with an introduction and background information regarding the Proposed Changes to SUNY Cortland�s Curriculum Change Guidelines/SUNY Cortland Curriculum Change Guide.


Cottone explained that the document being distributed consisted of a single page document, and the other document consisted of the actual curriculum change guide. The EPC chair further stated that this proposal was the culmination of three year�s work.  The EPC Committee proposal represents the most recent version since the 1977 curriculum  change guidelines and that it has not be reviewed in 30 years. Cottone clarified that the curriculum changes been reviewed by EPC in attempt to streamline the process.  He further explained that many of the issues resulted from issues raised from the College Curriculum Review Committee.  Cottone indicated that the proposal involving curriculum review has gone through no more than 10 revisions and was finished last February, submitted to the Provost in March and then shared with the Provost�s Cabinet, the College Curriculum Review Committee, the Graduate Faculty Executive Committee where it was forwarded to the EPC Committee.  Last spring Cottone, as EPC Chair, took comments received from campus feedback and compiled them with a significant amount of comments and issues raised, and then met with D. Margine in an attempt to try to imbed those suggestions as much as possible.  Cottone indicated that there were some issues outside the scope of the charge. The EPC Chair said that there may still be some existing work that needs to be done, but he explained that what the Senators were seeing in front of them represented a collaboration of a lot of people on campus being involved in the process.  He finished by saying, �I �d just like to thank everybody for their contribution, all the deans, chairs and committee chairs.�  He said that over a 2-1/2 week period when it was distributed for feedback recently the EPC Committee only received two comments because Cottone believed they were probably the only two people on campus w ho had not seen the document previously.  Cottone indicated that on the Senate floor there were probably 18 people in attendance who had already seen the document. He then opened the floor for questions.


M. King instructed the Senate that the proposal was being introduced for clarification and would be discussed fully for action at the next Senate meeting.  Chairman King also reminded everyone to please be on time due to the agenda items.


R. Spitzer asked, �Will the curriculum change would make it �A� more difficult, �B� less difficult or �C� �not sure.�� 


J. Cottone indicated the change would make it easier, saying, �Those are the things that we looked at, what bogs us down with curriculum, why do we get things back? What we attempted to do besides declassify, we tried to create a system that provided a better level of accountability at all levels. If it works the way it was designed then any problems should be stopped at the school level and so forth. We need to be more accountable and treat curriculum almost the way we treat personnel with timelines and policy types of things and, hopefully, if we do that we will have a more succinct, more streamlined, process.�


D. Margine referred to the forms as attachments explaning, �SUNY Cortland may have forgotten how to deal with curriculum details that do trip up people. Some of the documents wind up being returned so it really is a resource tool or a helpful aide to assist the overall process in general.�


J. Cottone indicated that one of his committee�s goals was to create a curriculum web page in which one could can go online to see examples of what his committee members consider good solid course outlines and course descriptions and mentioned the development of a tracking system to ascertain exactly where the proposal is


J. Governali said, �This raises a good issue. As John indicated we did this 30 years ago. I am in support to change this and change the way we do this and hopefully change the process, this may make things more streamlined. We should have a good discussion on this next week, because it may be another 30 years before we raise it again.�


K. Alwes asked, �Is all of this going to be in hard copy? Are the forms going to be available online so we can avoid cutting down more trees?�


N. Aumann indicated her office has been working on providing downloadable forms and there has been conversation as far as both a tracking system and being able to submit proposals. She said it is only in the planning stage right now but finished by saying, �Let�s make life much easier and save a few trees.�


K. Alwes asked, �Will this be treated as a minor/minor curriculum change?�


J. Cottone responded that minor/minor are called level 1 changes.


D. Margine said, ��depending on the nature of the curriculum�if you are going to make a decision that this is going to represent a level 1 change or a minor minor/minor change, that�s the only thing in transition.�


J. Cottone distributed the next item of business explaining that the handout was a proposal emanating from the College Curriculum Review Committee involving changes in committee membership.  He said that since the Faculty will be conducting its review of faculty governance this is coming forward now.


M. King said, �What we are considering here is a proposal will be eventually sent to Governance Review Committee to be incorporated or not if they decide.�  He then asked for questions or clarification.


M. Scala asked why the College Curriculum Review Committee goes from two student members to eliminating two student members.


An unknown individual from the floor responded that the question was addressed in the document under rationale.


J. Cottone said, �One of the main issues here, also deals with the fact that the committee has been unable to get students to sit on the committee over the last maybe 4-6 years, what poses a problem with the committee when it comes to reaching a quorum, the two voting members not there affect the actual operation of the committee. This was one big issue. It didn�t have anything to do with the students themselves. Sometimes the committee didn�t have a quorum.�


C. Schacht said, �There were 2 students with 15 members on there. What about the other 8 members?�


J. Cottone replied, �Every member of the committee is a voting member.


C, Schacht said, �Whether voting or non-voting you could still get their opinion.�


D. Margine said, �There has not been a student that has sat on the committee the last 5 years I attended. To allow students to come maybe as non voting ex-officio as you are suggesting might be very much accepted.


K. Boyes asked how they would solicit student opinion asking if they would come right to Student Government.


M. Scala referred to the rationale  how student opinion would be obtained. Cottone responded in the affirmative.


M. Scala said that the students could be notified regarding any issues and could discuss it in the Senate among other ways to solicit student�s opinions.


J. Cottone responded in agreement that students could be notified if additional feedback was warranted.


D. Berger said he was looking at the list on the first page of people on the committee, and inquired as to who was being referring to as being included as professionals from Academic Affairs.


D. Margine responded, �That would be the Office of Advisement and Transfer, Enrollment Management. Many of the professional areas are involved in curriculum matters.�


D. Ritchie added, �The library.�


M. Prus said, �There are also professionals within each of the schools.�


D. Berger said, �Professionals from Academic Affairs.


An unknown individual from the floor said, �Professionals that work with curriculum.�


M. King announced that both EPC proposals would be brought back before the Senate at the next meeting for discussion, vote and possible amendments .


Cottone asked M. King if the proposal would be acted on at the next meeting or if there was an intent to postpone it.


Chairman King asked Cottone if that was his preference.


Cottone responded that vote at the next meeting was his preference.


D. Ritchie asked for confirmation that the document would go to the Governance Review Committee after endorsement by the Senate on November 28.


M. King responded in the affirmative saying that after the EPC proposal was endorsed it would go to the Governance Review Committee for its five year review.



{SEE President�s Report}



There were no Area Senator�s reports.


XIII. SUNY SENATOR�S REPORT � M. Ware � No report.



K. Boyes reported that Cortaca went over well with the students being generally well behaved resulting in no major complaints.  The Winter Formal at the Lake Watch Inn In Ithaca on will December 7 with the price of admission $10.00 for students and $12.00 for faculty and staff.  Open House will be held in Old Main on Wednesday from 11-2 and in Corey Room 205.


Respectfully Submitted:


Barbara Kissel

Recording Secretary


The following reports are appended to the minutes in the order they are submitted:


(1)  Multi-Cultural Life Proposal submitted by Provost Elizabeth Davis-Russell.


(2) Proposed Changes to SUNY Cortland�s Curriculum Change Guidelines/SUNY Cortland Curriculum Change Guide.


(3)  Proposal for Change in the handbook: Chapter 150.03 Article VII, Section F regarding changing membership on the College Curriculum Review Committee.