CALL TO ORDER

President Hibbard called the meeting to order at 3:34 p.m., in Room 133 Gilbert Hall. No minutes from the February 9, 1993 meeting were circulated as the meeting from that date has continued on to these meeting.

REPORT OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE

Senator Fred Tepfer, Chair of the Senate Nominating Committee, reported that the Committee was placing the name of Senate President Michael Hibbard into nomination for the Senate position on the newly, Senate, created Undergraduate Council. President Hibbard asked if any other nominations were forthcoming and none were. President Hibbard was elected without opposition.

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE CONTINUES

The Senate resolved to return to the Senate as a Committee of the Whole. The following is the report Ms. Morgen, the Recorder for the Committee of the Whole:

During the Committee of the Whole discussion of the motion, as series of speakers--both advocates and opponents of the motion- -spoke to the merits and problems with the expanded requirement. Supporters included faculty, students and administrators. Proponents of the motion focused on the widespread desire of students for additional courses on race in particular and diversity issues in general; the national trend in peer institutions for serious requirements such as the one being debated, the wealth and sophistication of scholarship on race, gender, ethnicity, and cultural diversity; and the ways such courses fit in with the overriding mission of the University to contribute to a well informed public, a highly skilled work force, and public dialogue about the advancement of common social goals.

Opponents raised a host of issues about both the spirit of the new requirement and the costs of its implementation. Among the concerns raised by the faculty members who opposed the motion were concerns that the course might be overly narrow in its scope or "politically correct" in its orientation. One faculty member dismissed any potential of the course to "solve" the problem of racism in contemporary society.

RETURN TO THE SENATE AS A LEGISLATIVE BODY

Ms. Morgen was recognized to offer several amendments to the motion before the body.

The first amendment moved to change the second sentence of the document to read as follows:

"To begin this process, the Multicultural Curriculum Committee requests that the Senate approve the following changes in the Race, Gender, and Non-European Requirement. These changes will be effective for all undergraduates entering the University of Oregon beginning in the academic year 1994-95 unless the committee responsible for implementation of the requirement, upon evaluation of available courses, requests one additional year extension to ensure sufficient course availability for the meaningful implementation of the revised requirement."

Ms. Morgen stated that the implementation date of 1994-95 could prove to be too soon if the University was unable to fill all the needs to make the requirements feasible. The automatic extension to 1995-96 is included in the amendment to make sure that the responsible committee would not have to seek postponement for one year. The quality of the requirements is utmost in this amendment and if the quality would suffer by the earlier implementation date than the date of 1995-96 would already have approval. In answering a question from Senator O'Brien, Ms. Morgen said that the extension was automatic if the responsible committee felt the delay was necessary.

The amendment was approved by a vote of 36 yes, 0 no and 0 abstentions.

Senate President Hibbard interrupted presentation of the second amendment in order to have the fiscal impact statement presented by University President Myles Brand.

The cost of the revised requirement would be about $350,000 in the first year of its implementation. It would be necessary to hire 7 FTE to fill the needs created by the requirements President Brand stated. Although the cost was relatively large and the UO is facing a continuing budget cut due to Measure 5, the President was convinced that the UO could meet the demand of the requirements. Targets of Opportunity could be aimed at this problem. Annually the UO hires about 100 new faculty, it is probable that among those hired individuals could be found that would be able to teach the requirements.

Separate from the fiscal impact statement the President said that he supported the motion and that it was important for the UO to send its students forth with the ability to inter-relate with the world and to understand other cultures. This motion is important to the education of our students, he concluded.

Amendment number 2 was now presented by Ms. Morgen.

In #1. the words "Senate Curriculum Committee" should be removed and replaced with "University Committee on the Curriculum."

This was approved without opposition.

The 3rd amendment is aimed at clarification and not a change of intent for the Committee:

"The second course will foster a students understanding of diversity by focusing on how gender, race, ethnicity and/or class shape experience or identity, relations among social groups, or the creative expressions of women, peoples of color, ethnic minorities, and/or non-European cultures. These courses may be taught in a wide variety of disciplines and can explore either non-European or European societies. Since the primary pedagogical goal of this requirement is to enable students to better understand diversity as it is manifested within and characterizes our society in its global context, the committee shall encourage courses that provide students with conceptual tools and substantive material to facilitate these understandings."

Ms. Esther Jacobson, Art History, asked if religion should not be added to the list of "gender, race, ethnicity, and/or class" as religion and ethnicity cross constantly or is the list given in the amendment just examples? Ms. Morgen agreed that ethnicity and religion do cross and that the list is not all inconclusive. Ms. Jacobson asked why religion was left out as conflicts around the world have religion as a base to the conflict. Ms. Morgen said that courses on religion were not excluded by the Committee, but that the Committee was working toward categories.

Senator Osomagrosso said that religion was not a minority issue and that the Committee was working on minority issues. Senator Mary Rothbart moved to amend the amendment to include religion following the word "ethnicity". Senator Phil Ferguson in opposition to the amendment to the amendment stated that if this passed the way would be open to add other categories, e.g., sexual orientation, age, disability, etc. The list should be left as it is he asserted. Senator Ron Wixman joined in support of the amendment to the amendment as he saw a failure to understand religion as a major weakness in how people react to a given society. If, as an example, one did not understand the majority religion of the United States that person would never understand the treatment of minorities in the United States where much treatment of minorities has a religious base.

The move to amend the amendment failed by a vote of 17 yes, 21 no and 0 abstentions.

The vote on the amendment was approved without opposition.

Senator O'Brien asked if the titles to those who will be on the committee that are given as "Chair" in the motion could be corrected to read "Director" which is the correct title for each? President Hibbard so ordered the Secretary to make this correction.

Mr. Charles Wright, Mathematics and Chair of the Faculty Advisory Council, moved to have the faculty at-large number increased from "1" to "3." This was passed by a vote of 21 yes, 9 no, and 6 abstentions. Number 1 now reads:

"1. We move that the requirement be increased to two (2) courses to be chosen from a list of courses to be approved by a Senate- appointed seven (7) member standing committee which will review and recommend to the Committee on the Curriculum approval of existing and new classes for the requirement. The standing committee will review all courses which currently fulfill the requirement as well as new courses which are to be considered to fulfill the requirement. The standing committee will review approved courses periodically, minimally every two years. The standing committee shall be composed of the Director of Women's Studies (or appointee), the Director of Ethnic Studies (or appointee), the Director of International Studies (or appointee), one student appointed by the ASUO President and Student Senate, and three faculty members appointed by the University Senate. A member of the Committee on the Curriculum will be appointed to the standing committee as an ex-officio, non-voting member."

Ms. Morgen, asked what the rationality behind the amendment was. Mr. Wright stated that the added number of at-large faculty would remove the appearance of a special interest make-up of the Committee and to add legitimacy to the decisions of the Committee. In addition, the broader base of interest could not but help the Committee in its deliberations.

Mr. Paul Simonds, Anthropology, stated that the usual process of the Committee recommending to the Committee on the Curriculum, and that Committee on to the University Senate and the Senate on to the University Assembly would have been a safeguard against any special interest.

Ms. Kathryn Johnson, Assistant Registrar, was recognized and she asked about the number of credits for the courses. Would variable credit be available? These are technical questions, and more must be asked so that the Registrar will be able to anticipate the impact of the changes and how to arrange for the changes on transcripts. Mr. Quintard Taylor, History and a member of the Committee that wrote the motion, stated that he would be glad to meet with Ms. Johnson to clarify any of the technical problems. President Hibbard stated that this would be the best way to handle these problems.

The motion, as amended, was now before the Senate. The amended motion passed by a vote of 33 yes, 5 no, and 0 abstentions.

ADJOURNMENT

The business of the meeting having concluded the Senate adjourned at 5:04 p.m.

Keith Richard Secretary