University Senate - November 4, 2019 Meeting Minutes

Call to Order and Announcements

The University Senate was called to order at 3:30 p.m., in Room 111 Harrison Hall, Oxford Campus, on Monday, November 4, 2019.  Members absent:  Jason Abbitt, Kenya Ash, Stacey Lowery Bretz, Antonio Vasquez Lim, Ben Mitsch, Brandon Small, Susan Spellman, Scott Walter, and Jeffrey Wanko.

  1. Announcements and Remarks by the Chair of Senate Executive Committee, Dana Cox.
    1. On Thursday, November 14, 2019, in 320 King at 4.p.m., there will be an event featuring 40 new books written by Humanities faculty. Among those featured include books by four senators:  Michele Navakas (ENG), Gaile Pohlhaus (PHL), Susan Spellman (HCA), and Nicole Thesz (GRAMELAC).

    2. The partitioning of Kinesiology & Health is underway. The Process Coordinator is John Bailer who has met with the committee.  They plan to have a report to Senate by the end of fall semester.

    3. Professor Terri Barr (Marketing) is the Process Coordinator for the consolidation of Classics. The consolidation was requested by the Classics Chair at the end of spring semester 2019.  Professor Barr sent an update that there are currently four potential partner departments:  GRAMELAC, French and Italian, History, and Comparative Religion.  Professor Barr will be presenting her report to Senate on November 18, 2019.

    4. Senator Cox addressed an e-mail that was sent to senators on November 4, 2019, suggesting a course of action that needed to be taken regarding the TCPL discussion. Senator Cox stated that Executive Committee had no prior knowledge of the e-mail and feels that senate meetings are the time to advance, question, modify, or agree with arguments, after having talked with our constituents.  The concern is that e-mails, as a means to advance discussion with senate as a whole, contribute to a perception of closed doors and against a sense of public trust and transparency and that moving too early toward a specific action short circuits the discussion that was going to happen today.  Senators engaged in open discussion with the following comments and points being made:

      1. E-mail is not private we cannot keep people from talking. If we are concerned, we should create a listserv for an open discussion.  Some senators do meet outside of senate, and this e-mail was taken in the same regard.

      2. Do we want to get these e-mails? Senators have been told no in the past of having a statement read in their absence. 

      3. It was noted that the recipients of the e-mail were blind-copied. When Senator Cox asked senators to discuss the e-mail with their fellow senators, it was also discovered that not all senators received the message.

      4. There was a feeling was that the person was just sharing their feelings and that discussions outside of senate should not be prohibited.

      5. It was suggested that a written report be sent in, similar to how student senate operates.

      6. One senator asked if the question is how they (the e-mails) are acknowledged in Senate.  It was noted that this was the issue and that having a listserv would provide a record.

Approval of University Senate Minutes

  1. A motion was received, seconded, and carried to approve the October 8, 2018, amended minutes of University Senate and the November 4, 2019, minutes of University Senate. .

Consent Calendar

  1. The following items were received on the Consent Calendar.
    1. Curriculum

    2. Student Handbook 1.2 – Withdrawal from the University – Revision

    3. Student Handbook 1.2.C.3 – Undergraduate Course Repeat Policy – Revision

    4. MUPIM 6.6 – Summer and Winter Term Teaching – Revision

    5. MUPIM 7.2 – Student Evaluation of Teaching – Revision

    6. Governance Committee Minutes – October 8, 2019

    7. Governance Committee Minutes – October 22, 2019

New Business

  1. SR 20-05 – Bachelor of Science in Business – Business Analytics Major – L. Allison Farmer, Department of Information Systems & Analytics

    1. Professor Farmer explained that prospective students and employers are confused about the current Information Systems and Analytics major. The major has two tracks:  Information Systems and Business Analytics.  The proposal will create a separate Business Analytics major from the existing track.  All content is the same and no new resources will be used. 

    2. There were two questions and comments as SR 20-05 was being discussed:

      1. A student senator in the Farmer School of Business indicated that this is a positive change.

      2. A senator in the Farmer School of Business asked if this had any impact for FSB’s upcoming program review.  It was stressed that this a change in name only and that content and resource needs are not changing.

SR 20-05

November 4, 2019

BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that University Senate endorse the proposed degree, Bachelor of Science in Business, with a major in Business Analytics, Farmer School of Business;

AND FURTHERMORE, that the endorsement by University Senate of the proposed degree and major will be forwarded to the Miami University Board of Trustees for consideration.

SR 20-05 passed unanimously by voice vote.

  1. SR 20-06 – Master of Science in Business Management – Business Administration Major – Barnali Gupta, Associate Dean, Farmer School of Business

    1. The proposed 30-hour Degree was initially approved under Boldly Creative initiative a year ago. The program is distinct from an M.B.A. and strengthens core business knowledge with a culminating client project.  It has an embedded 12 hour certificate in Business Management.  The program is designed for students with a baccalaureate degree in any non-Business major with a cumulative GPA of at least 3.25.  Recent Miami University graduates are targeted, but it was noted that the program will accept applications from students with non-Miami undergraduate degrees.

    2. Professor Gupta indicated that the program is modular, and that the Business Core foundation is open to adoption into other programs. Any 12 of the 18 Business Core hours count toward the Business Management certificate.  The program also has a Foundation week component that starts before fall semester.  Resource requirements will be met with faculty teaching on overload.  The resource demands on faculty will be spread across all departments within the Farmer School of Business.

    3. The Fiscal impact statement was explained. The cohort will start at 30 students and is projected to grow to 50.  Courses are $1,000 per credit hour.  It was noted that the budget has not been approved by the Provost and that Boldly Creative approved $75,000 toward the costs.

    4. Senators engaged in a discussion with the following comments and questions:

      1. Is there a time limit to completing the program? The limit is the same as other graduate programs (five years.)

      2. Can an undergraduate student pursue this Master’s degree as a 3+1? No, it is based on market driven tuition and students need to have a degree. 

      3. Can the certificate be transferred to another institution? This is not a stand-alone certificate.  The University Registrar noted that the courses in the certificate would not be eligible for financial aid. 

      4. A concern was expressed about the sustainability of teaching on overload and whether this was a ‘backdoor’ way of getting temporary faculty approved. It is not expected that new faculty will have to be hired.  Faculty are committing indefinitely to teaching this on overload and every department chair has been supportive.

      5. The University Registrar asked whether the Foundation Week requirement has a course associated with it. It does not currently, and it was noted that it will need to if it needs to be marked as completed on the degree audit

      6. How large is the cohort? The initial cohort will be 30 students.  The cohort for the second year will be 40 students, and cohorts beyond year 2 will have 50 students.

      7. It was asked whether any of the program will be online. No, the program is 100% face to face.

      8. It was asked if this a terminal degree? No, it is not.

      9. How do the faculty feel about the program? There is self-selection among faculty who want to engage and be involved with graduate students.

      10. Currently, the closest program in the curriculum is the General Business minor, which is open only to non-business majors. The main difference is that the Master’s degree has a hands-on culminating experience.

    5. How are interested students from low income backgrounds going to be supported?  Unfortunately, the data on diversity from the M.B.A. program is not good.  It is hopeful that a different audience is going to be attracted for this program and that paid internships can be part of the client experience to make it more accessible.

SR 20-06

November 4, 2019

BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that University Senate endorse the proposed degree, Master of Science in Business Management, with a major in Business Administration, Farmer School of Business;

AND FURTHERMORE, that the endorsement by University Senate of the proposed degree and major will be forwarded to the Miami University Board of Trustees for consideration.

SR 20-06 passed unanimously by voice vote.

Old Business

  1. Ad Hoc Committee on Composition – Discussion – Kate de Medeiros and Jen Green, Co-Chairs

    1. Before discussion began, Professor de Medeiros wanted to clarify points regarding Recommendation 4 from the presentation on October 21, 2019. While the Committee was aware of the history of the cap and its changes over the years, they could not find a rationale between the cap and pedagogy.  There wasn’t a discussion about whether the student experience changes with different percentages of TCPL faculty.  The history of TCPL faculty has been included in the slides.

    2. Professor de Medeiros and Senator Green wanted to remind senators about the rationale behind changing the cap. There is caution about having the caps because one department would reach the cap and other departments may not be able to hire needed TCPLs.  Minimums can become outdated and constrain the type of faculty a department can hire based on the composition or hiring activities of another department.  This is just one rationale for replacing the University-wide shared cap with faculty composition guidelines created by and for divisions.

    3. Senators engaged in a discussion resulting in the following comments and questions:

      1. It was the suggestion of the ad-hoc committee that the department would create their own guidelines. The committee was not advocating for divisional caps.  There was concern that elimination the University cap would result in the ‘Wild wild west’.  Senators were assured that there were stop-gap measures that were recommended in the report to prevent this. 

      2. Provost Osborne indicated that the divisions are better at managing their own affairs, but the Deans cannot make necessary adjustments due to the University-wide cap. The university is not at the 25% limit, but some units are.

      3. Several senators expressed concern about removing caps entirely and ensuring that the teacher/scholar model is preserved. In reality, should there be a cap on VAPs?

      4. Programs should be able to request certain lines when they need them and not worry about the limits. It should be based on need.  Is there a point when we ever want to draw a line?  Is there a point where the teacher/scholar model will be in jeopardy?

      5. VAP lines were used as a way to get around the cap on TCPL. Guidelines need to be created based on pedagogy and TCPL hires shouldn’t be restricted based on an arbitrary number.

      6. There was appreciation expressed for the amount of work that the ad-hoc committee did. It was expressed that ‘one size does not fit all’ and that there need to be more open conversations, which may create better feelings among people who may have felt slighted.

      7. A suggestion was made to survey departments/programs to determine what ratio of T/TT to TCPL would be needed and then determine what the Divisional needs are. Senator Green reiterated that the ad-hoc committee conducted a campus-wide survey and focus groups.  In these discussions, there was a feeling that although there may be need for TCPL, departments don’t want to lose T/TT lines.  It was also stressed that departmental and divisional needs change over time.

      8. The question was asked as to if there has ever been a cap on VAPs? No, but that is something that senate can discuss.  There is concern is that there isn’t any flexibility in hiring.  How many visitors does the University need?

      9. Senator Cox motioned to suspend the discussion until a future meeting due to time constraints.


  1. Executive Committee Update – Dana Cox, Chair, Senate Executive Committee

    1. The elections for the Academic Programs Evaluation Steering Committee have almost concluded.  There is one election left (CAS) to complete.


  1. A motion was received, seconded, and carried to adjourn the Regular Session of University Senate. The meedting adjourned at 5:00 p.m.

Next scheduled meeting of University Senate:

November 18, 2019, 3:30 p.m.

Room 111 Harrison Hall, Oxford Campus