February 22, 2005


1.CALL TO ORDER: The 10th meeting of the Faculty Senate for 2004-2005 was called to order at 1:15 PM on February 22, 2005 in the Park Center Hall of Fame Room by Chair Ram Chaturvedi. �������������������������������������������������� �����������������������������������������������������������������������


SENATORS AND MEMBERS PRESENT: R. Chaturvedi, J. Rayle, P. Buckenmeyer,

D. Driscoll, D. Berger, M. King, K. Alwes, J. Cottone, J. Hokanson, K. Rombach, B. Griffen,

K. Pristash, A. Young, D. Walker, M. K. Boland, E. Bitterbaum, D. Davis-Russell, R. Franco,

B. Kissel, J. Governali, G. Clarke, J. Cottone, D. Kreh, P. Buckenmeyer


SENATORS AND MEMBERS ABSENT: C. DeGouff, P. Walsh, L. Anderson (sabattical), J. Peluso, D. Canaski, D. Ritchie, A. Henderson-Harr, T. Phillips, P. Schroeder, D. Vegas, W. Shaut, C. Plunkett


GUESTS PRESENT: G. Levine, J. Mosser, P. Koryzno, R. Olsson, Y. Murnane,

J. O�Callaghan, D. Margine, R. Grantham



The Minutes from February 8 were approved with one amendment. Homer Mitchell has brought it to the Senate�s attention that at the last Senate meeting in the President�s report, President Bitterbaum mentioned the address of the civic engagement website, which was listed in the Minutes incorrectly.The correct address is: web.cortland.edu/civicengagement.



There was a vote to approve the recommendations from the Committee on Committees (SEE Committee on Committee�s report} (Approved)


There was a vote to approve the proposed summer session reconfiguration proposal from the Educational Policy Committee.(Approved)


There was a vote to postpone vote on the Presentation Skills Proposal until the next Faculty Senate meeting on March 22 (Approved)



The Chair gave an update on the ad hoc committees for ROTC and Faculty Senate Reconstruction.Those committees are working and there is good hope that they will be able to have their work completed as scheduled.Both committees plan to have open meetings where they will present their proposal and receive input from the campus community.Chaturvedi announced that he hopes Senators will tell their constituents that this is important business and if they want to contribute anything he urged them to attend the open meetings, stressing that this is their opportunity to voice their feelings at this time. He thanked the members of these two committees who are working very hard.


The Steering Committee approved nominations from the Committee on Committees. Dave Kreh reported the necessity of doing this since at these had been overlooked at the previous Senate meeting and the Steering Committee did not want to hold up these committees from conducting their business.These committee nominations were announced and approved {SEE Committee on Committees}


Chaturvedi reported that John Ogden, Chair of LRPC, had asked the Steering Committee if his committee could hold an open meeting to bring the Senate and campus community up to date on the proposed long range plans and goals.He explained that it is a tradition that the Senate accommodates the LRPC committee in such a manner holding an open meeting in the spring semester to disseminate information and gather input from the campus.The meeting date will be announced at a later time.


The Chair reported on some newsworthy items from the President�s report at the Steering Committee on February 15: SUNY Cortland is working on an initiative to make foreign faculty feel more comfortable here on campus; there are some new documents from GEAR; there are 29 new searches for new faculty presently being conducted on campus; there was an inaccuracy that was reported on the SUNY system report where our rank was downgraded to below 5th place, which President Bitterbaum will make an attempt to rectify.




J. Rayle reported further about the Senate Reconstruction and ROTC Committee�s plans to hold open meetings on campus for information and feedback.He stated that the Senate Reconstruction Committee, which he serves on, has been having some frank and lively discussions as to how best accomplish their goals.One open meeting will be over in the PER building and two more will be held somewhere on the upper campus.They are still discussing representative models and the best way to proceed.



No report.





President Bitterbaum opened by discussing a number of exciting things that have been happening here on campus.Sigma Phi, the Scientific Resource Society here at SUNY Cortland,

is sponsoring a Nobel Laureate winner, Dr. Robert Richardson, who will talk about scientific quackery, announcing it would be a very interesting public talk, being held in Sperry 126 at 7:30.He said that, unfortunately, being held at the same time is the men�s and women�s basketball team playoffs, with the women�s event being held at 6:00 and the men�s at 8:00.He urged everyone to attend.


He reported news from the Provost�s Office involving GEAR, which stands for General Education Assessment Review, where we will be critically looking at Math, Critical Reasoning and Basic Communication. He announced that campuses are being assured by Albany that for the first time SUNY system will bare some of the cost to campuses for assessment measures.He said If we decide to use certain external instruments, or a locally developed one, Albany will pay for 20% of the cost.


On April 7 we will have a visit by a team from SUNY system regarding Mission Review II. The Provost has put together a group of faculty and staff who will be having a very fruitful dialogue.


The Mayor, with our cooperation, has received two grants, $750,000 and $200,000, to help gentrify the downtown area on Main Street, using the upper floors of buildings to possibly house apartments for some of our newer faculty and also providing classroom space. His office is talking to developers and there may be exhibits, such as our American Democracy Project.


He mentioned the proposed Student Life Centers and that 8 or 9 SUNY Presidents have gotten together to discuss the issue of students bonding to fund such a venture.Initially, he reported, Stony Brook was going to go forward by themselves, but some of the campus presidents decided to put together a one page sheet describing what a student center might look like.Bitterbaum expressed that since our budget has been deflated, there is not as much money for such centers as their once was given statewide reductions, and so additional funding would have to be looked into.


He reported his office is anxiously awaiting to see what will happen in this next legislative session. He announced his appreciation for UUP and everyone else who has been working diligently for the last four years.


His last item of business was to report that he and others will be going up to Albany on SUNY day where 64 campuses will be represented.



There were no questions for the President.



The Provost gave some additional information regarding GEAR in an attempt to further put it into context.She reminded everyone that when General Education Assessment was passed, it was passed in stages requiring a review of the major, or assessment of the major, and that the five programs that are being reviewed this year, are all in Arts and Sciences.She explained that we are now at the stage where external reviewers will be brought in.The second part of the assessment process was General Education campus based assessment, and we have been involved in that process. She explained that the third part is systemwide assessment, and those areas to be assessed are: quantitative skills, basic communication writing and critical thinking. She said that what we are expected to do which would be brought forward to the Faculty Senate for approval is aand we should be bringing to Faculty Senate for approval is a revised GE assessment plan, that will state how we will be assessing those three areas. Davis-Russell explained that our plan will be sent to Provost Salin�s office in early November, so the GE Committee will have to look at this beforehand, with a plan being developed so that the Senate would approve it thus readying it for submission in November.


President Bitterbaum added that because so many campuses are concerned about those 3 areas, since SUNY has such a large system, there has actually evolved a dialogue with major testing companies like ACT and ETC to see if they might work with SUNY to develop national exams. There will be a conference in late spring and all campuses will be invited. He ended by saying, �It will be intriguing to see if ETC or ACT actually does develop instruments for our use as a SUNY System.�


The Provost added that the original plan was to have campuses develop their own instruments that would be tied to some national existing norms, and the Provost and the committee provided some opportunities for campuses to respond to that original plan. The second option was to pull together a university wide team that would develop the instrument, and the third option was to work to develop and existing national companies that would do that.She added that it is fortunate that Albany will be paying for some of it to defray costs, because in assessing the majors it involves bringing in 2 external reviewers per program and this cost was not previously subsidized previously, coming from our own budget.


R. Franco reported on the proposed Student Life Center, announcing that his office will be putting together a Task Force charged by the President to review it. One thing his office would like to do this spring is have a referendum on campus with students, asking them if legislation were changed so the college could bond the student rec center, if the students be willing to pay for it by assessing themselves a fee to offset the debt.He reported that SUNY Brockport and Stony Brook already have had such a referendum.He felt that statewide it would be important that our students understand the value and importance of such a facility and program and be willing to assess themselves a fee to support it.


Franco reported that this past weekend the campus had 400 visitors, with a little over 30 campuses here for the 28th annual residence life conference, where residence assistants and hall directors from other campuses attended, which is something our campus should be proud to host, he said.


The Vice President announced that he had an opportunity the prior Thursday to walk through the new residence hall and take a tour accompanied by Mike Holland. Franco was pleased with the progress being made and the layout of the building, stating that it will be done on time and on budget.


The next item of business was that Mike Holland went to Student Senate a week ago and presented the budget proposal that had been worked on and previously reviewed by the Cabinet. The students did sign and endorse the budget along with room rates that will be imposed the next year. The Cabinet did approve some small funding needed for the radio station to broadcast over the web. He explained that WSUC is now located in Brockway Hall from its old location in the old bowling alley in Corey Union.Until the station can broadcast through the transmitter and on the airwaves, it will be broadcast on the web.He said, �We think this is a great service to the world including certain of our alums, who may like to listen to the commencement or sports events over WSUC.�


J. Mosser reported some news from Institutional Advancement, the first item that Victore Rumore, Foundation Board Chair, and President Bitterbaum, will be going to Albany on February 28 to meet with the Chancellor and other campus presidents and Foundation Board chairs to talk about fund raising. Pete Koryzno, Director of Public Relations and Government Relations, is busily organizing SUNY Day in Albany on March 14 so that �we can make the college�s case� with our area legislators.He reported that soon the president will be heading to Florida with Mosser�s staff in Institutional Advancement for a series of Florida reunions, as well as fund raising visits with some of our alums. The next item was about the Alumni House which is officially open for business, both for guest lodgings and department meeting functions, and he urged anyone if they wanted to put individuals up in guest rooms or for a department function to schedule it with Doug De Rancy, or staff, via email or by telephone.


On 4/23 will be the dedication of the Carol Horak Athletic Training Suite. He stated that J. Cottone and many alums have offered donations to make it possible to name the training suite in memory of Professor Horak on April 23, and it will be announced in the Bulletin as the time gets nearer.


Richard Martin, newly hired Web Manager, is officially on board and busy at work meeting with administrative units starting to do web redesign.He announced that the campus would be seeing some of his work on the web, and publications, as well as redesign of the college view book under Tracy Rammacher, and working on pieces for commencement, Honor�s and Scholar�s Day.


Mosser reported that Gradin Avery and Pete Korzyno have selected a marketing research firm to do marketing research for the college necessitated by the fact that our adm staff has identified there will be major changes to student demographics starting in 2010, and as a result the college is going to be proactive in doing some marketing research to help us position ourselves well, both in materials on the web and in print to prepare for the transition.


The Vice President stated that fund raising is going well with the drive being $400,000 ahead of last year�s pace.He and the staff in Enrollment Management are also working hard to develop new initiatives related to the scholarship program.


In Enrollment Management Mosser also reported a number of new initiatives, such as the fact that for the first time financial aid information will be packaged and send along with letters of acceptance from Admissions to students.


The staff of Institutional Advancement will be talking with people across the campus for the first draft of Mission Review II to put together a list of resource needs for the campus, and he hopes to bring a document to the campus later this semester for review and feedback.


Robert Rhodes, Professor Emeritus of English, is editing a new publication called Colloquium to help stay in touch with retirees and Emeritus faculty and staff.



D. Berger made a comment, as a member of the Psychology Department, saying that he felt that most would agree that having departments develop tests has the advantage of running some validity studies first. He felt this is very important because one can know what one is measuring, and he ended by stating that coming up with your own instrument, however, is not good.


The Provost responded to D. Berger, referring to Dr. Merle Canfield, a Social Psychology who happened to be in attendance at the Senate that day, and explained that Dr. Canfield is interested in those kinds of psychometric studies being discussing locally here on campus, not only the instruments, but the items.He will conduct a item analysis of some of our instruments and tel us some things we don�t know about them.


M. King asked Dr. Franco, in reference to WSUC broadcasting over the web, if we have the band width on campus to accommodate students on their desktop computers?


Franco responded that his office had been advised that we had that capability and that Communication Studies has also been involved, as well as Academic and Administrative Computing.


Dr. Bitterbaum added that people who were knowledgeable in the field advised them that the campus does have the bandwidth.




Long Range Planning Committee - J. Cottone had nothing new to report but did mention that his committee is still looking to fill vacant seats for Humanities/Fine arts and Math/Science. He asked anyone who is interested to please contact J. Barry or Steering Committee member.


Educational Policy Committee - J. Governali had nothing new to report.The Summer Session Reconfiguration Proposal from his committee was discussed and voted on and approved {SEE Old Business}


Student Affairs Committee - P. Buckenmeyer reported that his committee will be meeting on March 25 to review the Faculty Senate scholarships, the deadline of which is March 1. His committee is hopeful to have a candidate for this award.


Faculty Affairs Committee - G. Clarke reported that his committee is finally up and running and he has been elected as chair. The committee will be meeting every other Thursday from 3/1 - 4/28 in 206 Miller where they will finally be able to have a good discussion of the English and Physic�s Department policies, as well as also talk to a member of the Biology Department about some pending policies there, as well.


College Research Committee - No report.


General Education Committee - No report.






Committee on Committees - The following nominations were approved at the Faculty Senate Steering Committee on February 15, and endorsed on the Senate floor: College Curriculum Review, Professional Staff (2004-06), Linda Simmons; Professional Studies (2004-2006), Regina Grantham; Education (2004-06), Cindy Benton; Committee on Teaching Effectiveness, Math/Science (2001-05), Carol Bell; Faculty Affairs Committee, Fine Arts/Humanities (2003-05), Ed Moore; Library 2003-05), Karen Coombs (E. McCabe, sabbatical replacement).


J. Governali made the presentation, as Chair of the Educational Policy Committee, for the proposed summer session reconfiguration. Governali distributed a new page 2 to replace the original second page . He said that since the Faculty Senate last met the EPC had received some new information from SUNY which resulted in the revisions in the second page. Governali then gave some background history about the necessity of the proposal, which provides more flexibility and involves going from two summer sessions to seven sessions. He added that the proposal provides specific information regarding course start dates, which has been a chronic source of confusion for students seeking to drop courses. Since start dates are related to reimbursement, students need to be informed that they are only eligible for full reimbursement on the first two days of a session. He also noted that the reimbursement schedule is based on SUNY policy . The proposal also provides specific information about short courses within a 2-1/2 week academic session, explaining that regardless of length, they all have a common start date, which is the first day of the session. The proposal also stipulates that any course which meets for any time period within a two week session must provide students with a syllabus on or before the start date of the session, and on that syllabus must be a clear statement on reimbursement . Additionally, courses running less than 2-1/2 weeks must be offered on a special permission basis. He explained that for these courses the student has to get permission to register from the department offering the course, and as part of the permission process, the department has to provide information about the nature of the course and the reimbursement policy. The proposal also stipulates that as part of the permission process, students would be required to sign off indicating that they understand the nature of the course and the College reimbursement policy. Governali said it is up to the departments to make this information available to students, and to collect the necessary sign off forms which indicate student understanding of the course and the reimbursement policy. Internships and field experience are outside of the new format. He said the EPC recommended no changes in the existing course load policy .

M. King asked if the Registrar would be providing a boilerplate that the departments can put over the syllabus and have things available that students can sign for information for record keeping purposes.

D. Margine responded by reiterating that J. Governali had firmly stated that this responsibility would be up to the departments offering the courses within these time frames.

Governali supported the need for information and a sign off with the example of students in an asynchronous course not realizing that the course was computer-based and coming to the department office looking for a classroom for the course.

D. Margine said, "To follow up, when students don�t understand the delivery of the course and register in error, just prior to that they will remove themselves from the course at the start of the session, and Yvonne and summer session faculty will have to find a course that is prescribed at the last minute because students didn�t truly understand what was happening." She said, in working with a number of courses with special types of delivery, students understanding the type of delivery or special nuances of the course in advance of the registration process, would really lead to success, both of the course enrollment and delivery.

M. King suggested that, since he is teaching two online courses this summer, it would be awkward if the student lived in California.

Governali recommended, in that scenario, that the professor would have to contact the students and arrange to send them a description of the course and sign off form (perhaps by e-mail ).

M. King stated he thought SUNY Learning Center handled that.

D. Margine responded that there is a difference between courses taught asynchronously locally and those offered by SUNY Learning Network Media, which she reminded everyone, are two separate issues of course delivery. She also stated that a department secretary can very easily remove special permission, and a student taking a course from California can register here for the course if is it taught asynchronously locally.

D. Berger said, "I have noticed in the last few years a decline in the number of our students who want to take summer courses. Has the committee studied any of that? Are some of these changes in response to that or are we going to publicize our offerings more so we increase the likelihood of having a stronger more populated summer session?"

Governali responded that he could answer one question and would defer the other one to Murname. He said one of the reasons they changed the traditional summer session schedule was to make it more attractive to students and faculty.

Y. Murnane answered in response to enrollment, that for 2002-2004 there were 1200 students that participated in the summer session, which is a trend statewide showing a slight decline right now in summer school attendance. She said there is an indication that 2/3 or our students who attend summer school are graduates students, which might be helpful in looking at the situation.

The Provost asked if there was not actually an increase in enrollment for undergraduate students.

Murnane replied that last year we did have a slight increase in undergraduate enrollment with 30 more undergraduate students enrolled.

D. Berger asked, since he had experienced being "bombarded" on the news with ads from SUNY Oswego and their program, if we could not advertise the same way so that people out of this area can feel that we have a more attractive summer program.

Murnane responded that last year we did our marketing in SUNY newspapers and ads in local college newspapers aimed at undergraduate students with marketing in all major newspapers in Ithaca, Rome, Syracuse.

Berger said he was not sure how effective that (kind of advertising) is.

Murnane replied that "given the summer session has been given a special one time marketing fund, I would have to go back to key administrators to talk about funding so that would be more of that marketing." She said a local radio campaign was undergone in the beginning of December.

The chair reminded everyone to please confine their discussion to questions and inquiries specifically to the proposal as reported by J. Governali.

Murnane commended the EPC committee for their work. She explained that she had been invited at least twice to give information and answer questions and thought the committee was working from a very thorough standpoint. She said, in response to special permission courses, that it does keep appropriate students in courses, but coming from the view point of the Summer Session Office, often times it is difficult for students to reach departments, especially after graduation, to get permission, and this requires a strong commitment in departments involving secretaries and coordinators. She stressed that it is really important that there needs to be somebody in the department(s) who is available to work with the students when they call.

Governali responded to Murnane that he felt hers was a good comment and one that his committee had reflected on in their discussions, and he agreed that the department has responsibility in the process.

Murnane said that students are sometimes unable to reach the departments in an attempt for assistance. She felt that in number 4 where Governali referred to students having to sign off a statement of understanding as to the special ramifications in the special course, the graduate student is usually not on campus and unable to do so.

Governali reiterated that if the graduate student wanted to sign a statement of understanding, e-mail can be utilized, whereas the department sends an email making sure that the student understands the special nature of the course and there is an official record that is maintained in that department.

The Chair called for a vote and the proposal was approved.

Murnane reminded the Senate that the policy goes into affect summer of 2006.

The chair also reminded everyone that if any changes were necessary this proposal could always come back to the Senate at a later time and be addressed.

Murnane asked if there was any discussion, since this proposal was in effect for two years, if it would be reviewed again after that point as to whether or not it was successful?

Governali said that such an undertaking would require a faculty recommendation coming from the Faculty Senate.

Murnane asked if anyone was willing to make such a motion, to which Chaturvedi responded that any stipulations could be added at a later date.


������������������������������������������������������������� * * * * * * * *


The Presentation Skills Proposal was presented by R. Grantham for the Presentation Skills Committee.Before the discussion Grantham asked the chair if she could provide some information.She called everyone�s attention to a handout regarding Basic Communication Ten, which is to develop proficiency in oral discourse and evaluate an oral communication to establish criteria. Secondly, she stated, she has been asked questions referring to 3 credit courses specifically, and in response she shared page 38 of the current undergraduate catalog showing there is a statement there stating presentation skills courses are 3 credit courses. In the GE assessment plan that went into GEAR, Grantham reported, SUNY system indicates that on page 7 of their plan, which is now our plan, that courses designated as speaking intensive will be 3 credits. She pointed out that this was approved by the SUNY system. The last topic she stated, to refresh everyone�s memory, is that her committee is presenting all of this now because as a campus we are slightly behind, and we really should have been providing speaking intensive or presentation skills courses a whole lot earlier than now, thus, only just now bringing everything up to speed.


D. Berger mentioned that he raised this issue at the last meeting after conversing with R. Spitzer, who was out of town at the time, and Berger asked to yield the floor to him.


R. Spitzer responded, �I rise or sit to speak against both of them.�By way of background, he explained that he had chaired the committee that formulated the policy that became the college�s presentation skills policy. He passed around a handout which he had Xeroxed which were SUNY wide GE guidelines referring to basic communication, which is SUNY GE 10, and refers to oral communication. Last September, Spitzer went on to say, he was informed that the current Presentation Skills Committee was rejecting any courses under 3 credits, and as a consequence,. he contacted T. Mwanika, chair of the Committee back then, and pointed out the wording in the policy, explaining that the committee was not following it.He was told they were not doing that because this, in the long run, would put a greater burden on their committee.Spitzer then contacted the Provost, who graciously sent out an e-mail stating the college policy that any courses, regardless of the number of credit hours, should be allowed.However, Spitzer pointed out, in the succeeding 6 months the Presentation Skills Committee continued to ignore this policy.He then asked about the specific quotation in the college catalog pertaining to presentation skills constituting 3 credits.


Grantham pointed out the exact reference was on page 38 of the undergraduate catalog under General Education Assessment Plan.


Spitzer did not want to take the Senate�s time in reading the passage but said he would do so when he yielded the floor.He stated that during this past fall several departments, including Chemistry, Biology and Physics, reported to him that they were having courses rejected. He said, as for the proposal itself, there is nothing in the present policy, and to his knowledge in the SUNY guidelines, that stipulates the number of credits, emphasizing that this is because presentation skills is an attribute of a course that is affixed to a pre-existing course.He said it is neither logical nor sensible, to insist that it be a 3 credit course.He said the committee offered 3 justifications, but did not cite the catalog in doing so, and that they have not been consistent with our college or SUNY requirements. Spitzer pointed out to the SUNY requirements on his handout do not stipulate credit hour limits, and he further said, if you consider the other SUNY wide requirements on the same page, category 9 has to do with foreign language. He stated that this requirement for foreign language requires that you stipulate competency, and the point of the presentation skills requirement is to demonstrate competency. Spitzer stated, in terms of the second amendment concerning asynchronous courses, none has been proposed so far, at least as far as he read in the debate from the last meeting.He said it falls on a very simple matter, �Should the instructor giving the course deliver criteria, on criteria that presentation skills requires?�Spitzer said that given that faculty are required to teach and have the ability to read, is the criteria the ability of a faculty member to offer a course to stand or fall on how that faculty stands to meet said requirements subject to approval of the Presentation Skills Committee? He finished by saying, �And so I would urge defeat of both these proposals as inimical to the purpose of providing presentation skills for our students.�


The Provost explained, crucial to the controversy, the inconsistency that arose between the policy developed by the Presentation Skills Committee and the assessment plan submitted and approved by GEAR, and that this inconsistency needs to be reconciled.Provost Davis-Russell indicated she was not advocating for or against any policy, but just to make everyone aware of the inconsistency as it now stands.


D. Margine spoke to the Senate and reminded them that she has stated before that the implementation policy needs to be addressed before anything goes forward.She said that when the Presentation Skills Policy was voted into effect last spring by the Senate, it was mentioned as being consistent with SUNY policy and college policy.She said after the Senate and the President approved it, there was research done when CAP was developed, a degree audit and publication of the college catalog, that those consistencies were in place.She said when you look at every one of the courses that have been approved with our outcomes from SUNY system, they are a minimum of 3 credits, so in order to have a very level playing field, where all requirements could be evaluated equally, the assumption has been made that a 3 credit minimum is required to fulfill presentation skills criteria.She reminded everyone, additionally, that we have been out of compliance with SUNY GE 10 since the fall 2000 because the Presentation Skills requirements was developed to fulfill the present component, oral learning outcomes, that basic communication was supposed to be comprised of both written and oral communication. The courses, Margine stated, that have been approved locally and those that have come to us from other SUNY units to fulfill SUNY GE 10, which are all 3 credits, showing competency could be to show proficiency or articulation of equivalency to courses here at Cortland equivalent to 3 credit hour courses, in congruence with what the Provost just mentioned, that�s why this amendment should stand as is, she stated.


D. Berger stated that he was unclear of what it means for this to be a GE requirement. He said that right now in the Psychology Department they offer Senior Seminar, where seniors who end up taking it before they graduate, give presentations. He said this is not a GE course but would, however, probably satisfy the requirements.


Margine responded that what Berger referred to fulfills requirements of GE and SUNY GE 10.


Berger stated that it course is only open to Psychology majors and not everybody.


Margine said there are 21 courses presently approved to fulfill presentation skills requirements and, �We are hoping departments for major requirements across campus will submit that just as writing intensive, Liberal Arts and Gen Ed goes through their own process.�


K. Alwes asked R. Spitzer, that when he was comparing it to a foreign language and the students only had to demonstrate proficiency, was he suggesting there should be an exam to test proficiency in presentation skills?She said, �I wasn�t clear on that, instead of having to take a class?�


Spitzer responded to Alwes, with regard to presentation skills, it might be possible to do that but that was not the policy the college enacted, although there might be a reason to.


Alwes asked if you could just bring in the skills for presentation and be tested for competency?


Spitzer responded that presentation skills courses can be transferred in from another institution,�������������

but if the student did not take the course and wanted to demonstrate it, �I don�t think that would occur unless present policy were changed to allow for it.�


Alwes clarified her confusion since there is an obvious difference between the two (presentation skills and foreign language competency)


Spitzer referred to page 38 of the catalog which he had now read, and mentioned the presentation skills requirement, where 3 credits are referred to in parenthesis. He stated, �This catalog is in error. This is a mistake. I would like to know where it came from?It did not come from the policy passed by the Senate, to my knowledge, unless it was changed in the President�s Office.Perhaps it was, with all respect to the Registrar, she referred several times to assumptions having been made, but assumptions policies, but because one assumes something is such and such, that is no reason or justification for making policy. There is nothing in SUNY guidelines that stipulates presentation skills must be 3 credit courses from Albany. SUNY Cortland has every right too approve one and 2 credit courses. If you examine the legislative intent of the proposal, in relation to its wording, is any credit number, (and) not limited to 3 credits. I can�t account for 3 credit hours mentioned in the catalog but I am interested if it is by assumption and not policy. Policy is not assumption.�


The Provost stated that if you look at historical precedence, the GE assessment plan predates the policy. The plan was developed and submitted on campus in accordance with GEAR and they approved that then. She said it followed that whatever we do is consistent with the plan that we approved, and that plan stipulated three credits. She said the inconsistency came when the committee that developed the policy was not consistent with the plan that was submitted and approved.Davis-Russell further informed the Senate that she has appointed David Hollenbeck as chair of the Presentation Skills Committee, replacing T. Mwanika who is on sabattical.


There was a motion by D. Berger to postpone vote on the proposal until the following Senate meeting on March 22. The motion carried.



No new business.



D. Berger requested that when the Senate has important business on the agenda if the administrative reports could be submitted in writing in advance to allow for more time for debate and discussion. The chair stated that at the present time he felt the format was fine and should remain unchanged.





M. K. Boland reported that the following Monday at Student Senate they would be reports from ASC to talk about proposed changes to the meal plan which has been a huge student topic. The financial board is starting budget hearings for next year.The 4th Annual Festivus has a tentative date of April 24, which is a Sunday. The SGA web page is finally up after some delays.


The meeting was adjourned at 2:30 PM


Respectively Submitted,


Barbara Kissel

Recording Secretary


The following reports are appended to the Minutes in the order reported and submitted by Senators and other members.


(1) Educational Policy Committee Proposal for a Reconfigured Summer Session Schedule (Spring 2005), (note: revised page 2) submitted by J. Governali


(2) Guidelines for the Approval of SUNY�GER Courses submitted by R. Spitzer.