UNDERGRADUATE COUNCIL MEETING February 13, 2006 Rowe Conference Room, the Knight Library Present: Andrew Bonamici, Herb Chereck, Kelsea Feola, Hilary Gerdes, Peter Gilkey, Anne Laskaya, Julie Newton, Dorothee Ostmeier, Steven Pologe, Kathy Roberts, Ron Severson, Margarita Smith, Karen Sprague, Mark Thoma, Mary Ann Beecher, Kate Wagle, Paul Engelking, Absent: Deborah Exton, Dave Hubin, Martha Pitts, Malcolm Wilson, Wendy Mitchell, and Glenda Utsey Guest: JoAnna Gray, Co-Chair, Accreditation Committee
Minutes Minutes from the January 23 and January 30 meetings were distributed for review. A motion was made that the minutes be tentatively accepted pending review by the Council members. Corrections will be sent to Cathy Kraus.
Moved: Anne Laskaya Seconded: Ron Severson The motion passed unanimously.
Agenda No formal agenda was distributed. The Council continued discussion of the Grade Inflation Report. The most recent version of the report (with edits from Paul Engelking, Mark Thoma, and Karen Sprague) was distributed to the Council.
· Discussion The Council wants to be sure that the Grade Inflation report is clear and accurate and can be understood on its own. The purpose of including some information in addition to the %As and %As + Bs was discussed. o UO GPA data over time are included and used as an indicator of grade inflation to allow comparison to national data, which are reported as GPAs rather than %As or %As + Bs. o SAT scores and high school GPAs are included as an independent measure (though an imperfect one) of the academic strength of UO undergraduates over the period of the report.
Possible Recommendations from the Council A compilation of potential recommendations to accompany the Grade Inflation Report was distributed to Council members. The Council acknowledged that this report and the Council’s thinking about possible responses to grade inflation are the first step in establishing a process for addressing the problem. The Council felt it was important to present the report and potential recommendations to all groups that could have a stake in the issue. This would be done through forums and informational hearings presented to the University Senate, the ASUO, the FAC, curriculum committees and other groups. The ideas expressed during this phase would be used by the Council to draft a set of recommendations for Senate approval next fall (2006). It is important that recommendations not be too detailed and prescriptive, but rather provide tools that faculty can use to address the problem. It is important to remind the academic community that the curriculum is faculty- owned and there is a responsibility to be accountable in the evaluation of student work to both faculty peers and students. There must be an acknowledgement in a preamble to the potential recommendations that the report reflects the Council’s concern that grade inflation is a problem that should be dealt with at UO, not simply a fact to be accepted.. Anne Laskaya and Karen Sprague will work on developing the preamble to be presented to the Council by e-mail before the next meeting. The Chair entertained two motions from the Council:
1) A motion was made to accept the latest version of the Grade Inflation Report. Moved: Anne Laskaya Seconded: Steve Pologe The motion passed unanimously.
2) A motion was made to accept the compilation of recommendations from the Council with a preamble to be developed by Anne Laskaya and Karen Sprague. Moved: Ron Severson Seconded: Anne Laskaya The motion passed unanimously. The Council discussed the venues for distribution of the report and recommendations to the widest possible forums. Development of a detailed plan for distribution will be taken up at the next meeting. The next UGC meeting is scheduled for Monday, February 27, 2006, 1:00pm at Rowe Conference Room, the Knight Library. 
|
