��������������� �����May 6, 2008


1. CALL TO ORDER:  The fourteenth meeting of the Faculty Senate for 2007-2008 was called

to order at 1:10 PM on May 6, 2008 in the Park Center Hall of Fame Room by Chair Karla



SENATORS AND MEMBERS PRESENT:  K. Ales, B. Buxton, E. McCabe, D. Berger, I. Jubran,

K. Lawrence, N. Helsper, H. Botwinick, D. West, J. Reese, J. Walkuski, J. Governali, J. Hendrick, A. Dahlman,

D. Harrington, T. Vigars, D. Ritchie, T. Slack, M. Ware, S. Snell, J. Clark, C. Hahl, J. Riddock, E. Bitterbaum,

R. Peagler, D. West, J. Walkuski, S. Anderson, M. McGuire


SENATORS AND MEMBERS ABSENT: J Shedd, D. Miller, O. White, J. Rayle, J. Duncan, B. Langhans,

D. Videto, B. Schecter, E. Davis-Russell, R. Franco, W. Shaut, J. Ford, M. Connell


GUESTS PRESENT: P. Koryzno, R. Kendrick, M. Canfield



The minutes from April 22, 2008 were approved.



There was a vote to conduct an emergency Faculty Senate meeting on May 13, 2008 to discuss and vote onthe

General Education Assessment Plan (Approved)



Chair Alwes had no report.



B. Buxton � No report.



E. McCabe - no report.



D. Berger � The Treasurer reported that there was approximately $1181.68 in the Senate Treasury.He announced

the possibility of awarding two Faculty Senate scholarships next year.



President Bitterbaum gave a brief report regarding the budget situation.




Long Range Planning Committee � Janet Ford, Chair � No report (absent)


Educational Policy Committee � R. Kendrick, Chair � D. West reported that she had no report due to the

cancellation of a scheduled meeting.


Student Affairs Committee � M. Connell, Chair � No report (absent)


Faculty Affairs Committee � J. Walkuski, Chair � No report.


College Research Committee � No report.


General Education Committee � M. McGuire, Chair � The GE Committee Plan was distributed but not

acted on due to the report not being distributed beforehand.After discussion it was decided to hold an emergency

Faculty Senate meeting on May 13, 2008 to debate and vote on it {SEE Appendix 1)




Committee on Committees -J. Barry, Chair � E. McCabe, Faculty Senate Secretary, read the committee

nominations, which were approved, and results of the Senate elections {SEE Appendix 2)



T. Slack followed up on his report on April 22 regarding the 3% in energy savings, explaining that compared

to the desired goal of 80% energy reduction, the campus would meet its goal in 2050 at the present rate and he

commended everyone on campus for their efforts..


J. Walkuski recognized R. Peagler for his efforts as Interim Vice President for Student Affairs which was met

with a hearty round of applause.


XII. SUNY SENATOR�S REPORT � M. Ware � SUNY Senator Ware had no report but referred to the

e-mail from R. Moulton urging SUNY Cortland faculty to apply to serve on SUNY Faculty Senate

committees and encouraged anyone interested or having questions to contact her.



The students gave a brief report.



The GE Assessment Plan was distributed but not acted on due to the report not being made available beforehand.

After discussion it was decided to hold a brief emergency Faculty Senate meeting on May 13 to debate and

vote on it.


The Review of Governance business regarding discussion of formation of an ad hoc committee on the proposed

Professional Affairs Committee was addressed. There was a discussion to determine whether the Senate

was in favor of forming an ad hoc committee for the Professional Affairs Committee to conduct its work over

the summer. Although it was determined that the Senate was in favor of formation of such a committee, after

consideration it was decided that it was not feasible to conduct such an effort at this time due to several factors

including an insufficient time period to conduct elections. It was decided that the topic would be discussed in the

Fall.A straw vote was conducted in favor of the proposed Professional Affairs Committee, as outlined in the

Review of Governance Report, Part II, Committee Structure, which was approved.


The agenda item regarding a new Senate meeting time was not undertaken. It was decided to take up that business

in the Fall.



The Chair announced that the CTE and Faculty Affairs Committee will be charged in Fall 2008 with looking into

issues such as ownership, usage and privacy issues online; evaluation of online courses and the process regarding

Course Teacher Evaluations at SUNY Cortland.


Respectfully Submitted:


Barbara Kissel

Recording Secretary


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


(1)    General Education Assessment Plan 2008/09 � 2010/11 Draft 4/29/08 submitted by M. McGuire,

����������� Chair, GE Committee


(2)   Committee on Committees report submitted by J. Barry, Chair


(3)   Professional Affairs Committee Report submitted by H. Botwinick


(4)   TE Committee�s Role in Online Course Evaluation from the CTE Committee




M. McGuire, Chair, GE Committee -- 5/6/08


2008/09 � 2010/11


DRAFT 4/29/08

State University of New York College at Cortland





April 2008








����� ASSESSMENT PLAN FOR 2008/2009 - 2010/2011.............................................................. 3


A. Timetable....................................................................................................................... 4

B. Course Samples........................................................................................................... 5

C. Implementation Procedures........................................................................................ 6

D. Validity and Reliability Indices..................................................................................... 6

E.Assessment Instruments............................................................................................. 7

F.Assessment of the Campus Academic Environment�������������..7

G.Dissemination, Reporting, and Evaluation of Process������������...7





2008/09 � 2010/11





Starting in 2002/03, Cortland began a three-year assessment cycle of the SUNY GE knowledge, skill, and competency areas (SUNY College at Cortland 2004�2005 General Education Assessment Report).We are now completing the second three-year assessment cycle (2005/06 � 2007/08), modifying some of the assessment tasks which were identified as �TBD � To Be Determined� in the 2005/06 � 2007/2008 Plan.


In Fall 2007, SUNY Cortland proposed to the chair of the SUNY GE Committee to modify the Spring 2008 General Education assessment in 5 areas:

���������� GE 4 � United States History and Society

���������������������� GE 8 � The Arts

���������������������� GE 9 � Foreign Language

GE 10b. Basic Writing: Presentation Skills

GE Competency: Information Management

The changes to the assessment instruments and rubrics aimed to accomplish two goals:1) increase the validity of results, using the knowledge gained from the previous assessments in the GE categories; and 2) coordinate with the new GE Program introduced at SUNY Cortland in Fall 2007, which combines the SUNY and Cortland General Education programs.


���� ASSESSMENT PLAN 2008/09 - 2010/11


To increase the validity of General Education Assessment during the 2007-08 academic year (and the third year of our current 3-year cycle of GE Assessment), SUNY Cortland is modifying some of the assessment instruments and rubrics.Our 2005-2008 General Education Assessment Plan, approved by SUNY System, identified �essays or TBD � To Be Determined� for the Assessment Instrument, and �Cortland rubric or TBD,� for the rubric in all five of the categories to be assessed this year (mentioned above).The Assessment Plan noted that instruments and rubrics labeled as To Be Determined (TBD) �may be modified from the materials presented in the following pages based on ongoing development of these areas by ad hoc faculty groups.�The learning outcomes and rubrics remain the same but the instruments for assessing the outcomes have been revised.For GE 4, GE 8 and GE 10 faculty members were given the choice of using the previously approved essay exam or proposing an in-class exam or rating of a paper, presentation, project, portfolio, etc.These assessment procedures require approval by the various subcommittees of GE faculty.Any subjective assessment is checked for reliability by a second rater. In the instances when there is a discrepancy a third rater will be utilized.The GE 9 subcommittee developed a set of assessment procedures for foreign language.The GE categories that were not assessed this year will use the same procedures in the future.


The 2008/09 � 2010/2011 cycle of GE assessment at SUNY Cortland is built on the strengths of past GE assessment processes, as identified through the results of the ongoing assessment in GE categories and through self-assessment of our methodology for GE assessment.The modified assessment process for the new three-year cycle is described below.


The GE Committee and the office of Institutional Research and Assessment (IRA) developed this assessment plan, with input and support from ad hoc faculty groups, the Dean of the School of Arts and Sciences, the Associate Provost for Academic Affairs, and the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.Primary responsibility for implementation of the plan lies with the GE Committee and IRA, with support from the aforementioned administrative offices.The Cortland Faculty Senate endorsed this plan on�������������� , 2008.


A. Timetable

The order in which categories will be assessed in the proposed three-year cycle (Table 1) has been changed slightly from the previous cycle to encourage ongoing refinement of assessment instruments, particularly in some categories.This procedure will also again be assessed in three years.For example, GE 1 has not been assessed for more than five years due to the search for a satisfactory standardized instrument across SUNY schools.It is now planned that mathematics, or �Quantitative Skills� here at SUNY Cortland, will be assessed in 2008/09.Specifically, ad hoc faculty groups, the GE Committee and IRA are considering alternative measurement options and curricular issues.


Table 1.Proposed GE Assessment Schedule


Proposed Assessment Date

General Education Category

Last Assessment Date




2008/09(Spring (Administration)

GE 1 Quantitative Skills



GE 2Natural Sciences



GE 3Social Sciences



GE 5Western Civilization



GE 6Contrasting Cultures






GE 4U.S. History and Society



GE 7�� Humanities



GE 10 Basic Communication:

���������� Writing



GE Competency Area: Critical

��������� Thinking






GE8The Arts



GE9�� Foreign Language



GE 10 Basic Communication:

���������� Presentation Skills



GE Competency Area:

���������� Information Management



B. Course Samples

IRA will continue to take responsibility for selecting the sample of courses to be included in the assessment.The categories that are course-embedded will use a stratified random sampling procedure to ensure that the samples are representative of the population of students enrolled in GE courses in any semester.Specifically, this will be a two-level process: (1) a course-level cluster sampling procedure will be used to identify 25% of courses per knowledge, skill, or competency area; (2) a stratified random sampling approach (stratified according to course level, class size, time of class, and course content) will be used to identify and assess at least 20% of all students taking courses in a GE category in the assessment semester.

C. Implementation Procedures

The implementation has not changed and remains as follows.During the semester prior to the assessment, IRA will notify all faculty scheduled to teach courses in a category that their course may be selected for assessment in the following semester.The final sample of course sections to be assessed will be identified and notification sent to participating instructors, as well as chairs of departments, before the end of the fall semester prior to spring semester assessment.This will provide faculty with lead time for inclusion of the assessment activity in course planning and syllabi, and will provide an opportunity to remind all faculty who teach courses in a GE category of that category�s learning outcomes.


Faculty will be required to participate in the assessment if selected, using one of the assessment methods identified by the ad hoc faculty group for that GE category.Since most of the assessment tasks will be chosen by individual instructors and course-embedded, they will be integral to course requirements.A major advantage is that students will give their best effort because the activity is part of course assessment and their final grade.Faculty who choose the option to use an existing essay question as the assessment instrument will be strongly encouraged to give course credit or extra credit to their students for completing the activity. IRA will be responsible for producing and distributing assessment materials, recruitment and training of groups of faculty to grade essay assessments, and coordinating the work of ad hoc faculty groups who will interpret the instructors� marks for application of the rubrics.


D. Validity and Reliability Indices

Validity and reliability information has been collected since the start of Cortland�s GE Assessment Program.Expert opinion by faculty teaching in specific GE categories and ad hoc faculty groups will be used to assess face validity.We expect that face validity will increase during this new three-year cycle, as faculty members are more directly involved in the process, as individual instructors can determine the assessment tasks and be part of faculty groups for each GE category, reviewing proposed assessment tasks and assessment results in their fields of specialization.


E.Assessment Instruments

Although standardized essay questions and rubrics have been a staple in the Cortland GE Assessment Program to date, the results of previous GE assessment tasks indicated that faculty groups for each GE category are likely to be able to improve upon the instruments and rubrics.The changes this year are likely to include the use of multiple assessment tasks (non-standardized) that are course-embedded and already in use by instructors.Essays in some GE categories will be replaced by more performance measures that are more valid and appropriate for the area, e.g., portfolios for assessment in GE 8 � The Arts and oral presentations for assessment in GE 10b. � Basic Communication: Presentation Skills.

The office of Institutional Research and Assessment (IRA) will assist in organizing the development of new assessment tools.IRA will continue to provide support for the collection, collation, and analysis of the results and be responsible for submitting the GE Summary Reports to SUNY by September 1, 2008.The final reports will include information about the program improvements made as the result of the previous assessment for the specific GE category as well as a description of the deviations made from the GE Assessment Plan that has been reviewed and approved by the General Education Assessment and Review (GEAR) group.

F.Assessment of the Campus Academic Environment

The primary mechanism for assessing the campus academic environment will be the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE).As part of Strengthened Campus-Based Assessment (SCBA), NSSE was administered by SUNY System during the Spring Semester 2008 for the first time at SUNY Cortland.NSSE will be given on a regular bi-annual basis.


G.Dissemination, Reporting, and Evaluation of Process


At SUNY Cortland, the General Education Committee is comprised of faculty representation for each sub-division of the College and serves as a standing committee of the Faculty Senate. The GE Committee reviews, endorses and approves the GE assessment procedures for the College to assure best practices exist. The Committee meets bi-weekly and relies on the administrative structure and responsibilities of the office of IRA in carrying out all tasks of the Committee. Such tasks include, but are not restricted to sampling procedures, implementation of assessment procedures, analysis of results, and assessment reporting. The office of Institutional Research and Assessment conducts all General Education assessment tasks with the approval and support of the GE Committee. The success and viability of the GE Assessment Plan at SUNY Cortland is dependent on the cooperation and coordination between the entire College faculty, GE Committee, and office of Institutional Research and Assessment.

The office of Institutional Research and Assessment (IRA) will be responsible for analyzing the results of the assessment and for reporting the results to SUNY System in the Annual Summary Reports.At all stages of dissemination, data will be treated in aggregate form and anonymity of students, faculty members, and courses will be maintained.

Appendix I:Cortland Rubric Used for all General Education Categories





Reporting Category

Not Meeting Standard

Approaching Standard

Meeting Standard

Exceeding Standard

Cortland Rubric








Provides minimal or no evidence of understanding; makes no connections between Goals, Assumptions, & Objectives of the GE Category; and makes unclear or unwarranted connections to the assigned task.

Conveys a confused or inaccurate understanding of the course material; alludes to the Goals, Assumptions, & Objectives of the GE Category but makes unclear or unwarranted connections to the assigned task.

Conveys a basic understanding of the course material; makes few or superficial connections between the Goals, Assumptions, & Objectives of the GE Category and the assigned task.

Conveys a basic understanding of the course material; makes implicit connections between the Goals, Assumptions, & Objectives of the GE Category and the assigned task.

Conveys a thorough understanding of the course material; makes clear and explicit connections between the Goals, Assumptions, & Objectives of the GE Category and the assigned task.

Reveals an in-depth analysis of the course material; makes insightful connections between the Goals, Assumptions, & Objectives of the GE Category and the assigned task.


Appendix 2:Student Learning Outcomes for Each General Education



GE 2 (and GE 12).Natural Sciences





Students will demonstrate: 1.) an understanding of the methods scientists use to explore natural phenomena, including observation, hypothesis development, measurement and data collection, experimentation, evaluation of evidence, and employment of mathematical analysis; 2.) knowledge of the principles of one or more of the natural sciences; and 3.) the application of scientific data, concepts and models in one or more of the natural sciences and relate the relevant technology and principles they have studies to modern life.


GE 3.Social Sciences





Students will demonstrate: 1.) an understanding of the methods social scientists use to explore social phenomena, including observation, hypothesis development, measurement and data collection, experimentation, evaluation of evidence, and employment of mathematical and interpretive analysis; 2.) knowledge of major concepts, models and issues of at least one discipline in the social sciences.


GE 4.United States History and Society




Students will demonstrate: 1.) knowledge of a basic narrative of American history such as: political, economic, social, and cultural, including knowledge of unity and diversity in American society; 2.) an understanding of common institutions in American society and how they have affected different groups (including ethnic minorities and women); 3.) an understanding of America�s evolving relationship with the rest of the world; and 4.) an understanding of the American Republic by examining relationships among the state, intermediary institutions, and civil society.


GE 5.Western Civilization





Students will be able to: 1.) describe within an historical context major Western political, geopolitical, economic, social, and/or intellectual developments; 2.) analyze the relationship between the development of ideas and historical change in Western and other regions of the world; and 3.) discuss distinctive features of contemporary Western civilization in terms of such areas as history, institutions, economy, society and culture.


GE 6.Contrasting Cultures





Students will be able to: 1.) demonstrate an understanding of the distinctive features of the history, institutions, economy, society, culture, etc., of one non-Western civilization; 2.) compare and/or contrast another contemporary culture or other contemporary cultures with the dominant themes of U.S. culture; and 3.) demonstrate an understanding of cultural differences in world views, traditions, cultural institutions, values, social systems, languages and means of communication.


GE 7.Humanities





Students will: 1.) be able to critically respond to works in the humanities; 2.) be able to discuss major human concerns as they are treated in the humanities; and 3.) demonstrate an understanding of the conventions and methods of at least one area in the humanities.



GE 8.The Arts





Students will demonstrate an understanding of: 1.) at least one principal form of artistic expression and the creative process inherent therein; and 2.) the significance of artistic expression in past and/or present civilizations.



GE 9.Foreign Language





Students will demonstrate: 1.) basic proficiency in the understanding and use of a foreign language; and 2.) an understanding of the distinctive features of culture(s) associated with the language they are studying.



10b. Basic Communication: Presentation Skills





Students will: 1.) develop proficiency in oral discourse; and 2.) demonstrate the ability to evaluate an oral presentation according to established criteria.


GE Competency 2:Information Management





Students will: (a) perform the basic operations of personal computer use; (b) understand and use basic research techniques; and (c) locate, evaluate, and synthesize information from a variety of sources.




Committee on Committees � Report to the Faculty Senate

������������� J. Barry, Chair � May 6, 2008

Item # 1

The ballots were tallied for the referendum on restructuring the Faculty Senate.Therre were 235 valid ballots and 15 invalid ballots.The results were:

����������� 118 in favor

����������� 117 opposed

The two-thirds requirement was not met, so the referendum did not pass.

Item # 2

The following committee appointments are being recommended, and confirmation by the Faculty Senate is required:

At Large

         Educational Policy Committee (Academic At-Large) � appointed, 2-year term � David Barclay

         Facilities and Master Plan Oversight Committee � appointed, 3-year term � Chris Cirmo

 School of Arts & Sciences:

Arts & Sciences At Large

  • Educational Policy Committee - appointed, 2-year term � Bob Spitzer
  • Committee on Teaching Awards - appointed, term runs January 2009 through December 2011 � John Shedd


Fine Arts & Humanities

  • College Curriculum Review Committee - appointed, 2-year term � Kathy Lawrence

  School of Education

         College Curriculum Review Committee - appointed, 2-year term � Cindy Benton

         Educational Policy Committee � appointed, complete unexpired term 07-09 � Andrea Lachance  

 School of Professional Studies: 

  • College Curriculum Review - appointed, 2-year term � Jim Reese
  • Educational Policy Committee � appointed, 2-year term � Lynn Anderson



  • College Research Committee � appointed, 3-year term � Gretchen Herrmann


 Professional Staff:

  • College Curriculum Review Committee � appointed, 2-year term � Carol Costell Corbin
  • Educational Policy Committee � appointed, 2-year term � Mark Yacavon
  • Long Range Planning Committee � appointed, 3-year term � Josh Peluso
  • Student Affairs Committee � appointed, 2-year term � Jeremy Zhe-Heimerman


Item # 3

The Faculty Senate officers and committee elections have been conducted with the following results:

Vice Chair � Kathy Lawrence

Secretary � Janet Duncan

Treasurer � John Shedd

GE Committee:

����������� Academic at large (2008-10) � Donna West

����������� Fine Arts & Humanities (2008-10) � John Hartsock

����������� Professional Studies (2008-10) � Joy Hendrick

����������� Professional Staff (2007-09, complete unexpired term) � Valerie Jones


����������� At large (2008-11) � Henry Steck

Committee on Committees:

����������� Math/Science (2008-10) � Gayle Gleason

����������� Education (2008-10) � Emilie Kudela

����������� Professional Studies (2008-10) � Kate Coffey

����������� Professional Staff (2008-10) � Jennifer Janes

����������������������������������������������������������������������� APPENDIX 3

����������������������������������� ���� Memo regarding Professional Affairs Committee

����������������������� �� H. Botwinick, Chair, Review of Governance Committee � May 6, 2008


On page 18 of the detailed grid entitled �Proposed Changes to Senate Standing Committees� (Part One) the

Review of Governance Committee notes the following:


The Review of Governance Committee strongly recommends that the Senate add a Professional Affairs

Committee as an additional Standing Policy Committee of the Senate.The proposed committee would

essentially provide the functional equivalent of the Faculty Affairs Committee for professionals.


We further recommend that an ad hoc Senate committee be set up in order to determine the make-up and

duties of this new standing committee.All members of this ad hoc committee should be professional staff,

and membership should be elected from the following �functional areas:�

Chair elected at large from professional staff

1 rep from enrollment management

1 rep from student affairs

1 rep from information resources

1 rep from academic affairs

1 rep from finance and mgt/institutional advancement

3 at-large reps from professional staff


I therefore move that the Faculty Senate approve these recommendations by the Governance Committee and

that the Senate approve the immediate formation of an ad hoc committee of professionals who will be charged

with proposing the eventual make up and duties of this new Senate committee.


Pending Senate approval of the ad hoc committee�s recommendation, these proposals would then be placed

in a fall referendum which will include a number of additional charges to the Senate�s committee structure

and bylaws.


����������������������������������������������������������������������� ����� APPENDIX 4

Message from Karen Stearns, Chair, CTE Committee, 042608 to Karla Alwes Regarding the TE

Committee�s Role in Online Course Evaluation � Discussion for Next Faculty Senate Meeting


Dear Karla,

This is the essence of the interest in the TE Committee from Gail Wood and Dan Sidebottom �

    1. Immediate/Issue: Making CTE�s process available electronically through Banner

The campus now has the ability to move CTE�s to an electronic process through Banner/Web. It

could be optional, with faculty choosing to either use the electronic process or the (current)

semi-automatic process (with the bubble questionnaires, SCANtron).This would make the full

CTE process available for hybrid and online courses.

PROPOSAL FOR SHORT TERM� To run a pilot during the Summer sessions especially since many

of the courses are online. This pilot would use the same form now used. No questions would be added

or deleted.

    1. Issue: The process for adding questions is not clear and/or undocumented. There is a need to add more

questions, especially about the online learning environments.

PROPOSAL FOR LONG TERM: To address process for adding questions, specifically questions that

access online learning.

QUESTION: What role would the Senate like the TE committee to play in either of these processes? What

kind of approval, if any, does Academic Computing need to initiate the pilot? As for the second charge, what

role, if any, might the TE Committee play in adding questions that assess student experiences in online or hybrid

courses. Again, whose permission is necessary before Academic Computing revises the current CTE form?

If you would me to clarify further, please let me know. I will take whatever the Senate says in response back to

the committee.


Thanks Karla!!


Karen Stearns, Ph.D.