MINUTES OF THE FIRST MEETING OF THE GRADUATE COUNCIL FOR 1999
Graduate Council Room 1:10-2:05 P.M. January 13, 1999
Next Meeting: January 27, 1999, 1:10 P.M.
Note: These minutes are subject to correction and approval at a subsequent meeting.
Members of the Council
with Retirement Dates:
John Pritchett (Chair), Steve McFarland (Vice Chair), David Haney (August 1999), Jo Heath (August 1999), Jackie Mize (August 1999), Larry Teeter (August 1999), Tom Petee (August 1999), Wayne Brewer (August 2000), Fennechiena Dane (August 2000), Tin-Man Lau (August 2000), Jim Sartin (August 2000), Narendra Singh (August 2000), William Spencer (August 2000), Ajay Banga (August 2001), Charlotte Sutton (August 2001), Ralph Zee (August 2001), David Promis (student 1998).
Members Absent: Zee
Minutes of November 18, 1999, Council meeting approved.
Pritchett moved and Petee seconded the adoption of an addition to current admissions requirements, to be added to the end of the entry on admissions requirements in the Auburn University Bulletin, p. 173. McFarland recommended extending the policy to include international institutions. McFarland also asked if the policy specifically excluded doctoral degree applications. The Ad Hoc Committee responded in the affirmative. Banga inquired about the policy in the case of special or unique circumstances. Pritchett explained that such cases would be evaluated on a case by case basis. In its final form, the policy would be:
For master’s degree applicants only, attainment of either an earned professional degree at the doctoral level or an earned graduate degree at the doctoral level (Ph.D., Ed.D.) from a regionally accredited institution or an international institution recognized by the Graduate School may be substituted for the GRE/GMAT requirement. Such substitutions must be recommended on a case by case basis by the unit program to which application is made and approved by the Graduate School.
These earned professional degrees at the doctoral level, according to the Center for Education Statistics of the US Department of Education, include: Dentistry (DDS or DMD), Law (JD), Medicine (MD), Optometry (OD), Osteopathic Medicine (DO), Podiatry (DP), Theology (DD), Veterinary (DVM), Pharmacy (Pharm.D), and Chiropractic (DC, DCM).
The motion carried without opposition.
Haney moved and Mize seconded the approval of 14 appointments and 65 reappointments to the Graduate Faculty. The motion passed without opposition. Haney explained that ten additional nominations had been sent back to departments for further information and consideration.
Heath questioned limiting the remediation plan to courses numbered at the 500-level or above and recommended allowing the inclusion of 600 and 700-level courses to provide more flexibility in meeting the needs of students. By general consensus, the Council agreed that the policy should allow such courses to be included in the remediation plan and strongly affirmed that courses taken while under remediation not count toward the degree. Graduate-level courses for which grades below C were earned cannot be repeated while under remediation.
Stephen L. McFarland
Secretary
Winter 1999 Graduate Council Meetings
January 27
February 10
February 24
March 10
MINUTES OF THE SECOND MEETING OF THE GRADUATE COUNCIL FOR 1999
Graduate Council Room 1:10-2:25 P.M. January 27, 1999
Next Meeting: February 10, 1999, 1:10 P.M.
Members Absent: Promis, Sartin, Sing, Spencer
Minutes of January 13, 1999, Council meeting approved.
McFarland identified the problem of students using special topic and independent study courses to raise grade point averages. Mize explained that the issue had come before the Council before and that the Council had asked departmental graduate program officers to identify courses that should be graded as satisfactory/unsatisfactory. Heath stated that the new retention policy should help reduce the problem. Zee expressed the belief that any class structured on a one-to-one, professor-to-student basis should be graded satisfactory/unsatisfactory. Brewer agreed, but argued that there could be exceptions, as identified and justified by departments. Haney pointed out that in English graduate students were not allowed to register for such courses unless they had a minimum 3.5 GPA. McFarland identified the discriminatory policy of allowing some students in some departments to earn letter grades for such courses, but denying students in other departments that opportunity. Pritchett agreed to identify the courses and to contact the departments offering them about switching them to satisfactory/unsatisfactory.
McFarland identified the problem of students enrolled in non-thesis master’s programs taking more than one quarter to complete their non-thesis master’s projects. Because these courses generally come at the end of a student’s program, when all other course work has been completed, students have been registering for GRAD0000 Clearing Registration in order to complete the projects. GRAD0000 costs the student a relatively small registration fee and no tuition. University policy is that this course is to be used but once for such a purpose. Students requiring additional quarters to complete their projects and continuing to register for GRAD0000 would not be paying tuition for the use of university resources. Haney and Heath pointed out that the university charges tuition of master’s and doctoral students who were required to register for 0699 and 0799 each quarter while they used university resources. An extensive discussion brought no solution. McFarland proposed contacting all departments with such non-thesis project/capstone courses to meet with the Dean of the Graduate School and the Registrar to suggest possible solutions.
Graduate Council Room 1:10-1:50 P.M. February 24, 1999
Next Meeting: March 10, 1999, 1:10 P.M.
Members Absent: Banga, Promis
Minutes of January 27, 1999, Council meeting approved.
Pritchett also explained that recent legal decisions had made using a cutoff for the GRE questionable. The Educational Testing Service will not support universities using cutoff scores in their admissions policies and discourages the adding of verbal and quantitative scores. Standardized exams are to be used only as indicators of ability for the first six months of a student’s graduate career. Pritchett also explained that SACS requires graduate programs to review their admissions standards regularly. He therefore charged the ad hoc admissions committee (Spencer, chair; Pritchett; Jackson; Mize; Brewer; and Sutton) to review all Graduate School admissions standards and reminded the Council that any changes would have to be reviewed and approved not only by the Graduate Council, but also Academic Standards and the University Counsel.
1) McFarland moved and Petee seconded the approval of the Master of Building Science semester degree and program proposal from the Department of Building Science. The motion passed without opposition.
2) McFarland moved and Singh seconded the approval of the Master of Arts (thesis) and Master of Arts (non-thesis) semester degree and program proposal from the Department of Communication. The motion passed without opposition.
3) McFarland moved and Teeter seconded the approval of the Doctor of Philosophy in Economics (interdepartmental) semester degree and program proposal from the Department of Economics, the Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, and the School of Forestry. The motion passed without opposition.
4) McFarland moved and Heath seconded the approval of a revision to EDLD0625 Internship from EFLT. The proposal was to change the variable credit for the course from 5-15 to 1-15. The motion passed without opposition.
5) McFarland moved and Spencer seconded the approval of a request to establish a Sport Management Minor to be offered jointly by the Department of Health and Human Performance; Department of Educational Foundations, Leadership and Technology; and the Master of Business Administration program. The motion passed without opposition.
Haney moved and Mize seconded the approval of 7 appointments and 23 reappointments to the Graduate Faculty. The motion passed without opposition. Haney explained that one additional nomination had been sent back to a department because the candidate for reappointment did not meet standards.
Spencer reported that he had contacted the Graduate Dean at the University of Tennessee concerning admissions standards and that a preliminary meeting of the ad hoc committee (Spencer, Pritchett, Jackson, Mize, Brewer, Sutton) on admissions standards would meet to discuss the issue. Pritchett explained that the American Association of Universities had set a standard ratio of graduate to undergraduate students at comprehensive research universities of 40:60. Auburn’s ratio is currently 11:89. Pritchett stated that he hoped to change this ratio by attempting to establish a program of tuition remission for graduate assistants and increasing graduate assistant stipends.
MINUTES OF THE FOURTH MEETING OF THE GRADUATE COUNCIL FOR 1999
Graduate Council Room 1:10-2:50 P.M. April 7, 1999
Next Meeting: April 21, 1999, 1:10 P.M.
John Pritchett (Chair), Steve McFarland (Vice Chair), David Haney (August 1999), Jo Heath (August 1999), Jackie Mize (August 1999), Larry Teeter (August 1999-David South, substitute), Tom Petee (August 1999), Wayne Brewer (August 2000), Fennechiena Dane (August 2000), Tin-Man Lau (August 2000), Jim Sartin (August 2000), Narendra Singh (August 2000), William Spencer (August 2000), Heidi Anderson-Harper (August 2001), Charlotte Sutton (August 2001), Ralph Zee (August 2001), David Promis (student 1998).
Members Absent: Dane, Petee, Promis, Sartin.
Minutes of February 24, 1999, Council meeting approved.
McFarland moved the approval of the semester degree and curricula proposals from Poultry Science (Master of Agriculture/non-thesis, Master of Science/thesis, and Doctor of Philosophy). Singh seconded. The motion passed without opposition.
Haney moved the approval of 7 appointments and 2 reappointments to the Graduate Faculty. Singh seconded. The motion passed without opposition.
Pritchett introduced Carol Warfield (Consumer Affairs) and Bill Walsh (Textile Engineering) and briefly explained the history of the joint textile programs between Consumer Affairs and Textile Engineering, including the creation of a joint Ph.D. program in Integrated Textile and Apparel Science, which received ACHE approval in November 1997. To achieve consistency, the departments proposed to eliminate the Master of Science in Textile Science and replace it with a Master of Science in Integrated Textile and Apparel Science, with thesis and non-thesis options. Walsh and Warfield explained the narrowness of the old program and how the flexibility and breadth of the new Ph.D. program had indicated the need to modify the master’s level program. The non-thesis master of science option will open the program to distance education through video outreach. Pritchett explained that the change from the Master of Science in Textile Science to the Master of Science in Integrated Textile and Apparel Science was primarily a name change that would require ACHE action. The addition of the non-thesis option would not require ACHE action nor approval, but would require university approval through the curriculum process.
Discussion focused on the non-thesis master’s program. South expressed concern over using “master of science” for both the thesis and non-thesis master’s. Zee noted that the “master of science” is traditionally recognized as a research-based program. Warfield and Walsh explained that there was no generally recognized title for a non-thesis master’s program in the field and that the non-thesis option would concentrate on how to access and utilize existing research than on the generation of research. McFarland explained that with the advent of OASIS all master of arts and master of science degrees that were non-thesis were designated as such in OASIS and on the student’s transcript (MSNT for master of science non-thesis and MANT for master of arts non-thesis). Brewer expressed concern about non-thesis students only talking about research and being examined on research, but not doing any research. Anderson-Harper questioned how the addition of a new program was justified during a time of downsizing. Pritchett replied that this was not the addition of a new program, but the restructuring of an old one. Pritchett also pointed out that there were a number of programs on campus with non-thesis options under the MS and MA title: English, Geology, Physics, Political Science, Management, Marketing, Finance, and Industrial Design (MID).
Mize moved and Sutton seconded that the Council approve the name change from the Master of Science in Textile Science to the Master of Science in Integrated Textile and Apparel Science and that the Council request that the two departments send the non-thesis option through the normal curriculum approval process. The motion passed without opposition. The Council directed the Graduate Council Curriculum Committee to examine the proposal when it arrived with special attention paid to the need for a capstone project or course to complete the program.
Spring 1999 Graduate Council Meetings
April 21
May 5
May 19
May 26
ATTACHMENT 1
RETENTION POLICY FOR SEMESTERS
“Only grades on Auburn University courses approved for graduate credit will be used in determining the overall grade point average for continuation in Graduate School. Incomplete grades will be computed as C for continuation purposes. If at the end of any semester the CGGPA falls below 3.0, the student will be placed on academic probation. If the CGGPA remains below 3.0 after the next nine credit hours of graduate enrollment (both graded and ungraded), the student will be placed on academic suspension. The student may be re-admitted only after completion of a remediation plan recommended by the academic unit and approved by the Dean of the Graduate School. No coursework taken as part of the remediation plan may count toward the student’s degree or CGGPA. Graduate-level courses for which grades below C were earned may not be repeated during the remediation period.”
ATTACHMENT 2
REVISION OF BULLETIN POLICY FOR SEMESTERS
“In order to receive a graduate degree at Auburn University, a student must earn a cumulative GPA of 3.0 on a 4.0 scale on all courses carrying graduate credit. No more than nine hours beyond the student’s plan of study is allowed in obtaining the cumulative graduate grade point average (CGGPA). No grade below C is acceptable for credit toward a graduate degree. Each graduate course on which a grade below C is received must be repeated at Auburn University whether or not it is listed on the student’s plan of study. Both the original grade and the grade for the repeated course will be counted in calculating the CGGPA. Course credits transferred from another institution may not be used to satisfy this requirement. Courses retaken will not count against the nine-hour limit beyond the student’s plan of study in obtaining the minimum CGGPA.”
MINUTES OF THE FIFTH MEETING OF THE GRADUATE COUNCIL FOR 1999
Graduate Council Room 1:10-3:10 P.M. April 21 1999
Next Meeting: May 5, 1999, 1:10 P.M.
John Pritchett (Chair), Steve McFarland (Vice Chair), David Haney (August 1999), Jo Heath (August 1999), Jackie Mize (August 1999), Larry Teeter (August 1999-David South, substitute), Tom Petee (August 1999), Wayne Brewer (August 2000), Fennechiena Dane (August 2000), Tin-Man Lau (August 2000), Jim Sartin (August 2000), Narendra Singh (August 2000), William Spencer (August 2000), Heidi Anderson-Harper (August 2001-Kem Krueger substitute), Charlotte Sutton (August 2001), Ralph Zee (August 2001), David Promis (student 1998).
Members Absent: Brewer, Mize, Promis, Sartin, Spencer, Sutton.
Minutes of April 7, 1999, Council meeting approved as amended.
Rowsey explained the origins of INED0750 Alternative Residence Seminar. The seminar, for two credit hours, is required for 3 consecutive quarters for 3 Education departments and for 4 consecutive quarters for 4 Education departments in lieu of the standard full-time year-in-residency requirement for doctoral degree programs. Students attend full-time in a summer quarter; enroll in INED0750 for fall, winter, and spring quarters; and return for a full-time summer quarter. The usual enrollment for INED0750 is 8 to 10 students. Students are required to complete graded assignments and compete for grades. Rowsey therefore proposed that INED0750 be approved for A, B, C, D, and F grading rather than the current S-U grading.
Kaminsky stated that faculty felt the instructional goals of the seminar would be better met “in an environment of moderate risk with formative and summative external rewards.” He stated that summative assessment should not be all or nothing S-U because grading provided productive feedback at appropriate intervals. Risk-taking encouraged competition, which enhanced the learning process.
The Council had asked McFarland previously to provide information on past grading practices in INED0750. From fall 1993 to winter 1999, 337 students had registered for INED0750, with 245 assigned the grade of S (satisfactory), 88 the grade of A, 1 the grade of F, and 3 had no grade reported.
Pritchett asked if A-F letter grading was approved, would it apply to all College of Education departments. Rowsey replied in the affirmative. Pritchett also asked if there were syllabi for the course with assessment instruments. Kaminsky replied in the affirmative. Zee asked were the challenge and risk was that Education felt was so necessary if all but one student had earned an A or an S in 5 years. Kaminsky replied that students registered for INED0750 were all doctoral students who had been previously screened and were therefore performing at a superior level.
South asked if the course could be renamed to exclude seminar in the title. Zee responded that such a solution would be a cheap way out, ignoring the fundamental issue that similar seminars across campus are graded S-U. Pritchett pointed out that the course title was historical and may have been misnamed originally. Haney expressed concern about counting any such course in the GPA, but not on the plan of study. He stated that this was a policy issue and that the course should not be used to boost the GPA. Pritchett pointed back to the grade record for the course, where Curriculum and Teaching, EFLT, and Vocational Education students had made up the vast majority of the registrations for INED0750, yet the faculty in those departments had preferred to assign the grade of S rather than A at a 3:1 ratio.
Haney expressed concern as to how grading this course could be formative if all students would earn the grade of A. Rowsey replied that the issue was one of motivation for students. Haney pointed out that the faculty could still require formative assignments with A-F grading and then assign S-U summative grading at the end of the term.
McFarland suggested the possibility of setting OASIS to allow A-F grading, but not counting INED0750 grades in the GPA calculation. Kaminsky stated that such a solution was necessary because grading courses A-F worked. Haney asked for evidence of such an assertion because all students had been assigned As or Ss and there was no control group. Dane stated her support for allowing A-F grading, but not counting the As in the GPA. Haney opposed not counting all grades earned in graduate courses in the GPA.
South moved changing the name of INED0750 from Alternative Residence Seminar to Alternative Residency. The motion died for lack of a second.
Zee moved to leave INED0750 S\U graded with the name of the course remaining Alternative Residence Seminar. Heath seconded. The motion passed without opposition.
Haney moved the approval of 5 appointments to the Graduate Faculty. Dane seconded. The motion passed without opposition.
Pritchett distributed the report of the committee to the Council for discussion at the next Council meeting.
ALABAMA INSTITUTIONS
FALL 1997 ENROLLMENTS
REGIONAL PEER INSTITUTIONS
FALL 1998 ENROLLMENTS
MINUTES OF THE SIXTH MEETING OF THE GRADUATE COUNCIL FOR 1999
Graduate Council Room 1:10-1:45 P.M. May 5, 1999
Next Meeting: May 19, 1999, 1:10 P.M.
Members Absent: Promis, Sartin, Zee.
Minutes of April 21, 1999, Council meeting approved.
Spencer informed the Council on the continued activities of the subcommittee. Issues discussed included the use of cutoff scores, the practice of adding verbal and quantitative scores, the over-reliance on single quantitative criteria, the centralized nature of the decision process, the relative influence of various elements in the admissions formula, and the need for a more flexible process. The subcommittee has decided to review the admissions policies of 12 institutions (University of Georgia, University of Tennessee, Louisiana State, Texas Tech, University of Alabama, Florida State, University of Florida, Mississippi State, Texas A&M, Clemson, University of Arkansas, and University of Kentucky) prior to formulating new admission standards.
Dane asked if this would lead to the Graduate School removing itself from the admissions process and turning it over to individual departments. Pritchett explained this would not be the case. The Graduate School would continue to collect admissions data on applicants and continue to enforce minimum standards (such as the TOEFL and certification of baccalaureate degrees). Pritchett pointed out that the University of Alabama allows students not meeting university minimums to enroll for a certain number of hours in a provisional status to give the applicant an opportunity to demonstrate his or her qualifications for graduate study. Brewer expressed concern about the lack of standards in some departments. Spencer replied that this was always a concern, but that recent court cases and statements by the Educational Testing Service (concerning its opposition to using total and cutoff scores) made changes necessary. Under admission standards under consideration, departments would set minimum qualifications, but these would still be subject to Graduate Council approval. South expressed concerns that setting standards by grade point averages would reward students from institutions suffering from grade inflation. Mize expressed confidence that the subcommittee could develop appropriate standards to prevent such problems.
MINUTES OF THE SEVENTH MEETING OF THE GRADUATE COUNCIL FOR 1999
Graduate Council Room 1:10-2:20 P.M. May 19, 1999
Next Meeting: May 26, 1999, 1:10 P.M.
Members Absent: Dane, Petee, Promis, Sartin, Singh, Zee.
Minutes of May 5, 1999, Council meeting approved.
Spencer updated the Council on admission procedures at Clemson, Texas A&M, University of Tennessee-Knoxville, University of Kentucky, Mississippi State, University of Arkansas, and University of Alabama. He also distributed extensive and detailed admissions policies from Texas Tech as well as a draft of new admissions criteria for Council consideration. Pritchett advised that any new admissions policy would have to go through Academic Standards, the university lawyer, and the University Senate.
South inquired as to why Auburn refused to accept GRE scores more than 5 years old. Pritchett explained that this was an Educational Testing Service policy. Mize explained that the Admission Standards Subcommittee was considering a proposal to make this a departmental decision. Haney felt it would be constructive to have each department come up with a set of specific criteria for Council consideration.
MINUTES OF THE EIGHTH MEETING OF THE GRADUATE COUNCIL FOR 1999
Graduate Council Room 1:30-3:00 P.M. May 26, 1999
Next Meeting: June 23, 1999, 1:10 P.M.
Members Absent: Brewer, Dane, Promis, Sartin.
Minutes of May 19, 1999, Council meeting approved.
Spencer presented a new draft of evolving revised graduate admission standards, including a summary table of the admissions procedures of peer institutions (See Attachment 2). Mize explained the value of publicizing a minimum GPA. Heath inquired about the motivation behind the revision process. Mize explained that the revisions were motivated by recent court decisions, the Educational Testing Service’s recommendations that institutions not use combined test scores nor minimum cutoff scores, and the desire to increase the flexibility of the admissions process to deal with applicants on an individual basis.
Zee expressed concern that without concrete requirements, departments might adopt capricious admissions requirements. Pritchett pointed out that departments would have to prepare specific criteria, but these would require the approval of the Graduate Council. Pritchett also explained that meeting minimum admission requirements would not guarantee admission. If a department did not have funding to support a student or did not have a position for the student, admission should be denied. South reinforced the idea of denying admission if no vacancies existed in a specific area. Haney identified the special nature of admission requirements in the humanities, which had to remain “fuzzy” because requirements changed as the admissions period evolved.
Because of difficulties in identifying which hours to use in calculating grade point averages, some of which would come from undergraduate work and others from graduate work, Haney suggested using the last 60 semester hours, regardless of level. Pritchett argued this could be misleading because a student with an undergraduate degree in one area and graduate experience in another area might apply to an Auburn graduate program in a different area. McFarland reminded the Council that departments would still receive transcripts that would allow them to examine a student’s performance in selective areas. McFarland also reminded the subcommittee of the need to include a statement about applicants with earned
doctorates being exempted from submitting scores for standardized tests, as per existing policy.
The subcommittee will incorporate these suggestions into a final draft to be discussed at a future meeting.
Summer 1999 Graduate Council Meetings
June 23
July 7
July 21
August 11
ATTACHMENT #1
RESOLUTION OF THE UNIVERSITY SENATE
Whereas high quality graduate assistants are necessary to research, instruction and outreach at any comprehensive research university, including Auburn University; and
Whereas a sufficient number of high quality graduate assistants is a fundamental,
university wide priority in much the same way as the Library or the Core Curriculum; and
Whereas the percentage of graduate students at Auburn University is now a dangerously low 12% of the student population, a percentage that compares very poorly to the average of 23% for our regional peer Research I and II institutions ; and
Whereas we are not competitive for graduate assistants as is evident from the fact that only 53% of the prospective graduate students who are accepted into our graduate programs actually enroll, in contrast to 78% for the University of Alabama, 68% at the University of Georgia, and 63% at the University of Tennessee; and
Whereas all of our competitor peer institutions offer in-state tuition waivers to all of their graduate assistants and we do not,
Therefore be it resolved that the University Senate strongly recommends that Auburn University generate as many Instate Tuition Fellowships for Graduate Assistants as possible, as quickly as possible, until we are able to offer one to every Graduate Assistant at Auburn University.
ATTACHMENT #2
ADMISSION PROCEDURES
*4-yr degree required of all. TOEFL for all international students also required.
Admission for MBA Programs
Draft 1 of Proposed Graduate School Admissions Criteria
Regular admission is awarded to applicants who intend to pursue a degree and who meet all of the following requirements:
MINUTES OF THE NINTH MEETING OF THE GRADUATE COUNCIL FOR 1999
Graduate Council Room 1:30-2:10 P.M. June 23, 1999
Next Meeting: July 7, 1999, 1:10 P.M.
John Pritchett (Chair), Steve McFarland (Vice Chair), David Haney (August 1999-Drew Clark substitute), Jo Heath (August 1999), Jackie Mize (August 1999), Larry Teeter (August 1999), Tom Petee (August 1999), Wayne Brewer (August 2000), Fennechiena Dane (August 2000), Tin-Man Lau (August 2000), Jim Sartin (August 2000), Narendra Singh (August 2000), William Spencer (August 2000), Heidi Anderson-Harper (August 2001), Charlotte Sutton (August 2001), Ralph Zee (August 2001), Chris Middendorf (student 1999).
Members Absent: Heath, Sartin, Singh, Middendorf
Minutes of May 26, 1999, Council meeting approved.
Pritchett moved and Anderson-Harper seconded the approval of 4 appointments and 3 reappointments to the Graduate Faculty. The motion passed without opposition.
Spencer moved and Mize seconded the approval of the committee’s proposed admissions policy (see Attachment 2). Pritchett suggested delaying any vote on such a substantive issue until all members of the Council had time to examine the proposed policy and to share it with their departments, colleges, and schools. The suggestion was accepted by consensus. Dane suggested the proposed policy be distributed to all Graduate Program Officers. McFarland stated that he would attach it to the minutes for distribution to all members of the Council, all deans, and all Graduate Program Officers.
Subsequent discussion of the proposed policy focused on the issue of standardized tests and whether the GRE or GMAT should be required of all applicants. McFarland expressed concern that requiring or not requiring a standardized test on a departmental basis might lead to confusion in the graduate admissions process. This and other issues will be discussed at the next Graduate Council meeting on July 7, with a vote taken on July 21. Implementation of the new policy once approved would be fall 2000.
GUIDELINES FOR GRADUATE ASSISTANTSHIPS
PROPOSED GRADUATE SCHOOL ADMISSIONS CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES
APPLICATION PROCEDURES
To apply for graduate study, one must submit to the Office of Graduate Admissions:
Admission to any graduate degree program is granted by the Dean of the Graduate School upon the recommendation of the department of proposed study. Applications and all other relevant material must be received by the Graduate School at least three weeks before the first day of classes of the semester in which the student wishes to begin graduate study. However, most academic units make admission decisions several months in advance. Thus, applicants should check with the department to which they seek admission to determine when materials should be submitted. Approval is valid for a maximum of twelve months beyond the entrance date given on the application. If the student does not register during this period, a new request for approval must be submitted.
Application files will not be evaluated until all of the above requirements have been met. Applicants will be notified by the Director of Graduate Admissions when an admissions decision has been made. Some departments, operating with a limited number of spaces for students each year, make final decisions for the Fall semester in early Spring.
ADMISSION REQUIREMENTS
MINUTES OF THE TENTH MEETING OF THE GRADUATE COUNCIL FOR 1999
Graduate Council Room 1:30-2:20 P.M. July 7, 1999
Next Meeting: July 21, 1999, 1:10 P.M.
Members Absent: Anderson-Harper, Middendorf, Sartin, Zee
Minutes of June 23, 1999, Council meeting approved.
McFarland reported that several GPOs had requested specific information about the effect of the proposed admission policy on individual departments. Pritchett stated that departments will have to submit individual plans to the Council for approval. Specific procedures and guidelines for the proposed policy are to be sent to each department along with a request for feedback prior to July 16.
Dane expressed concern that statements such as “normally will have a 2.75 grade point average” would be setting minimums. Brewer explained that the use of words or phrases such as “normally” or “a typical applicant” with a minimum grade point average serve only as indicators, not as minimums.
Mize stated the need for the inclusion of a statement that departments consult a number of factors when considering applicants for admission.
Pritchett stated that the final policy will be sent to Academic Standards, the court monitor, and the University Senate.
Randall McDaniel of Rehabilitation and Special Education appeared before the Council to explain a proposed plan to offer a Master of Education degree using distance education technology. The program would include both distance and resident components. Using a federal government grant, the program would pay expenses for 25 students on a trial basis. These students would have to satisfy existing admission requirements. Students would be subject to rules and procedures of the existing Master of Education degree programs.
In answer to Council questions, McDaniel reported that students who might drop out of the program would be replaced. McFarland suggested moving a required independent study course to the end of the program rather than requiring it in the second quarter to allow students to pursue independent study after completing a number of content courses. Spencer asked if EFLT and Counseling and Counseling Psychology had been consulted about three courses those departments would be offering as part of the program. Pritchett indicated that such coordination would be essential. McDaniel replied that such consultations would be forthcoming. Heath asked if the program would have the necessary accommodations for students with disabilities. McDaniel replied in the affirmative.
Heath moved the approval of the proposal with the understanding that McDaniel reappear before the Council in one year to examine the progress of the program. Petee seconded. The motion passed without opposition.
MINUTES OF THE ELEVENTH MEETING OF THE GRADUATE COUNCIL FOR 1999
Graduate Council Room 1:10-2:00 P.M. July 21, 1999
Next Meeting: August 11, 1999, 1:10 P.M.
Members Absent: Petee, Sartin, Singh
Minutes of July 7, 1999, Council meeting were approved.
Pritchett moved the approval of 8 appointments to the Graduate Faculty. Mize seconded. The motion passed without opposition.
Mize moved to approve new Graduate School admissions policies (see Attachment 1). Anderson-Harper seconded.
Heath questioned whether the number of spaces for new graduate students in a department or program and the department of program’s resources should be considered elements affecting a student’s “potential for success,” as in the existing proposal. By consensus the language in this paragraph was rewritten to clarify the factors considered in the admissions process.
McFarland raised a number of issues coming from faculty in response to the proposal distributed to all departments for comment. These ranged from concerns that the revised admissions policy might lower standards to concerns that undergraduate grades might lose their value after a number of years. After discussion, no action was taken on these issues.
Several members suggested changes in style, overall organization, and terminology.
The motion passed with one member in opposition.
Pritchett explained that the revised admissions policy would be transmitted along with the current policy to the University Counsel for delivery to the Court Monitor. If approved, he would inform the Academic Standards Committee and the University Senate before submission to the President for potential implementation fall semester, 2000.
None.
Fall 1999 Graduate Council Meetings
October 6
October 20
November 3
November 17
PROPOSED GRADUATE ADMISSIONS POLICY
Admission to any graduate degree program is granted by the Dean of the Graduate School upon the recommendation of the department of proposed study. Applications and all other relevant material must be received by the Graduate School at least six weeks before the first day of classes of the semester in which the student wishes to begin graduate study. International applicants should submit all required materials at least twelve weeks before the first day of classes of the semester in which the student wishes to begin graduate study. Deadlines set by the Graduate School are listed in the front of the Auburn University Bulletin. However, most academic units make admission decisions several months in advance. Thus, applicants should check with the department to which they seek admission to determine when materials should be submitted. Approval is valid for a maximum of twelve months beyond the entrance date given on the application. If the student does not register during this period, a new request for approval must be submitted.
Departments make admissions decisions based on the compatibility of the applicant’s goals with departmental resources, the availability of spaces for new students, and a holistic evaluation of the applicant’s potential for success in the program. Other considerations might typically include standardized test scores, grades and/or grade point averages, letters of recommendation, writing samples, research or applied experience, and interviews.
To be considered for admission, the applicant must satisfy the following requirements:
Final evaluation of application files will not occur until all of the above requirements have been met. Applicants will be notified by the Dean of the Graduate School when an admissions decision has been made. Some departments, operating with a limited number of spaces for students each year, make final decisions for the fall semester in early spring.
MINUTES OF THE TWELFTH MEETING OF THE GRADUATE COUNCIL FOR 1999
Graduate Council Room 1:10-2:15 P.M. October 6, 1999
Next Meeting: October 20, 1999, 1:10 P.M.
John Pritchett (Chair), Steve McFarland (Vice Chair), Wayne Brewer (August 2000), Fennechiena Dane (August 2000), Tin-Man Lau (August 2000), Jim Sartin (August 2000), Narendra Singh (August 2000), William Spencer (August 2000), Heidi Anderson-Harper (August 2001), Charlotte Sutton (August 2001), Ralph Zee (August 2001), Art Chappelka (August 2002), Miriam Clark (August 2002), Chris Rodger (August 2002), Daniel Szechi (August 2002), Jean Weese (August 2002), Chris Middendorf (student 1999).
Members Absent: Sutton
Minutes of July 21, 1999, Council meeting were approved.
A graduate student may elect any course to be graded under the Satisfactory (S)-Unsatisfactory (U) option, except for courses required on the Plan of Study, if the major professor so recommends. Students are not allowed to select this option after the 10th class day (15th class day for semesters). Courses listed on the Plan of Study must be graded A, B, C, D, or F except for those designated as S/U. Similarly a graduate student may elect to audit any course not on the Plan of Study. The student may not change from audit to credit after classes begin, but may change from credit to audit before the 10th class day (15th class day for semesters). All use of the S/U and audit option requires approval of the Graduate School.
McFarland moved and Singh seconded the approval of the following semester degree and curriculum proposals. The motion passed without opposition.
Brewer moved the approval of 26 appointments to the Graduate Faculty. Spencer seconded. The motion passed without opposition.
Pritchett explained that for many years the Council had required Doctor of Education students in the College of Education to include at least one graduate faculty member on their doctoral committees from outside of their department. The merger of Vocational Education into Curriculum and Teaching and into Educational Foundations, Leadership and Technology has created problems in this regard. Pritchett recommended dropping the requirement because the reasons behind the initial policy have disappeared. Spencer moved that the Doctor of Education committee requirements be made the same as those for the Doctor of Philosophy. Anderson-Harper seconded. The motion passed without opposition.
Pritchett read a resolution commending former members Haney, Heath, Mize, Petee, and Teeter for their service on the Graduate Council. Anderson-Harper moved and Clark seconded approval. The motion passed without opposition. (See Attachment 2)
McFarland presented the continuing problems of calculating graduate grade point averages for students with incomplete grades (IN and NR) on their records. He explained that currently an IN is counted as a C and an NR is counted as an F for grade point average computation. After a brief discussion of the topic, Pritchett formed an ad hoc committee of Anderson-Harper (chair), Spencer, Roger, and Weese to examine the issue and report back to the Council at a later date.
McFarland presented the proposed Graduate School calendar for the first academic year after the semester transition. (See Attachment 3)
Anderson-Harper read and moved adoption of a resolution commending Pritchett and McFarland for their service to the Graduate Council from former member and Chair, University Senate, Jo Heath. Spencer seconded. The motion passed without opposition. (See Attachment 4)
ALABAMA COUNCIL OF GRADUATE DEANS SURVEY (Fall 1998 data)
RESOLUTION BY THE GRADUATE COUNCIL
WHEREAS the Graduate Council recommends regulations and policies affecting the graduate curricula and work leading to graduate degrees at Auburn University and assists the Graduate Dean in the execution of regulations and policies; and
WHEREAS Council members contribute much effort and many hours to the important work of the Council; and
WHEREAS David Haney, Jo Heath, Jackie Mize, Tom Petee, and Larry Teeter completed their service on the Graduate Council July 21, 1999;
Therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Graduate Council of Auburn University commends Drs. Haney, Heath, Mize, Petee, and Teeter for their outstanding service and extends sincere thanks and appreciation.
For the Graduate Council this 6th day of October, 1999:
John F. Pritchett, Chair and
Dean of the Graduate School
ATTACHMENT 3
Semester Calendar
FALL 2000 (SEMESTER)
May 26 Last day for completing international applications for admission
(including all transcripts and TOEFL, GRE or GMAT scores)
July 7 Last day for completing domestic applications for admission (including
all transcripts and GRE or GMAT scores)
August 17 Orientation for new graduate students (9:00-11:00 A.M.)
August 22 Classes begin
September 1 Last day for acceptance of approved drafts of doctoral dissertations and
last day to apply for foreign language examinations
September 4 Labor Day Holiday
September 18-29 Submission of thesis rough drafts for format check
September 23-
October 15 Registration for spring semester
September 28 Foreign language examinations
October 12 Mid-semester and last day to drop courses
October 27 Last day for submission of approved theses to Graduate School in final
form and last day for filing Form 9 (report of thesis-option final
oral examination)
November 17 Last day for doctoral and non-thesis final oral examinations
November 22-26 Thanksgiving Holiday
November 27 Last day for submission of final copies of dissertations to Graduate
School
December 7 Classes end for semester
December 8 Dead Day
December 9, 11-14 Final examinations for semester
December 16 Graduation. Last day for students to request graduation applications in
Graduate School for May graduation (students must be registered
no later than the fifteenth class day to graduate)
SPRING 2001 (SEMESTER)
October 13 Last day for completing international applications for admission
November 24 Last day for completing domestic applications for admission (including
January 10 Classes begin
January 15 Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday
January 19 Last day for acceptance of approved drafts of doctoral dissertations and
February 5-16 Submission of thesis rough drafts for format check
February 17-
March 11 Registration for summer and fall semester
February 8 Foreign language examinations
March 2 Mid-semester and last day to drop courses
March 16 Last day for submission of approved theses to Graduate School in final
March 26-April 1 Spring Break
April 13 Last day for doctoral and non-thesis final oral examinations
April 20 Last day for submission of final copies of dissertations to Graduate
May 2 Classes end for semester
May 3 Dead Day
May 4, 5, 7-9 Final examinations for semester
May 12 Graduation. Last day for students to request graduation applications in
Graduate School for August graduation (students must be
registered no later than the fifteenth class day to graduate)
SUMMER 2001 (SEMESTER)
February 23 Last day for completing international applications for admission
April 6 Last day for completing domestic applications for admission (including
May 23 Classes begin
May 28 Memorial Day Holiday
June 1 Last day for acceptance of approved drafts of doctoral dissertations and
June 11-22 Submission of thesis rough drafts for format check
June 21 Foreign language examinations
June 27 Mid-semester and last day to drop courses
July 4 Independence Day Holiday
July 6 Last day for submission of approved theses to Graduate School in final
July 18 Last day for doctoral and non-thesis final oral examinations
July 25 Last day for submission of final copies of dissertations to Graduate
August 2 Classes end for semester
August 3 Dead Day
August 4, 6-9 Final examinations for semester
August 11 Graduation. Last day for students to request graduation applications in
Graduate School for December graduation (students must be
ATTACHMENT 4
Heath Resolution
WHEREAS John Pritchett and Steve McFarland offer the faculty on the Graduate Council the right and the responsibility to make the academic decisions regarding graduate programs and courses,
WHEREAS the Graduate Council is well run, efficient, and productive under their leadership,
WHEREAS it is almost fun to be on the Graduate Council,
Be it RESOLVED that faculty in general, and many in particular, applaud the shared governance principles of John Pritchett and Steve McFarland, and
Be it further RESOLVED that we, the faculty, extend our appreciation and approval for a committee well done.
MINUTES OF THE THIRTEENTH MEETING OF THE GRADUATE COUNCIL FOR 1999
Graduate Council Room 1:10-1:55 P.M. October 20, 1999
Next Meeting: November 3, 1999, 1:10 P.M.
Members Absent: Anderson-Harper (Berger substitute)
Minutes of October 6, 1999, Council meeting were approved.
Sartin informed the Council that post-doctoral fellowships had largely replaced the Doctor of Philosophy as the terminal “degree” in the field of biomedical sciences. To be a viable candidate for a faculty position, applicants generally must have a two-year post-doctoral fellowship. Auburn has such fellowships, but does not have an established procedure for certifying the completion of such training fellowships. Participants do not register for classes, nor are they admitted to any programs. Sartin reported that the College of Veterinary Medicine had at least 6 such fellows at this time.
Zee asked if the Graduate School would have to maintain records for such certifications. Clark suggested such records might better be kept in the College of Veterinary Medicine. Pritchett explained that other colleges and schools on campus also had post-doctoral fellowships. Brewer expressed concern that certification might indicate something that was actually accomplished, especially because a post-doc is but a job-employment without accomplishment of any set requirements. Zee argued that record-keeping as an employee would be inadequate for any certification, while Dane suggested employee records are kept by the university. Weese suggested that the university’s new non-tenure track faculty process might be used for such cases.
Pritchett will name an ad hoc committee to evaluate the proposal, with Sartin as the chair.
Pritchett explained that the revised Graduate Admissions Policy still had to go to Academic Standards and then to the University Senate, but might need revising because of the difference between the undergraduate records of US versus international applicants. Departments have weighted undergraduate grade point averages heavily, but have not used grades in evaluating international applicants because of difficulties in evaluating international grading schemes. In the past the Graduate Council has set a minimum requirement of 500 on the quantitative or verbal section of the GRE, with a minimum total score of 800 for admission. He suggested that the revised admission policy might need to be modified to include suggested minimum GRE scores for international applicants.
Sutton reminded the Council that any revision should also include the GMAT score for any department requiring the GMAT rather than the GRE. Rodger asked if the addition of a suggested GRE/GMAT minimum requirement might discriminate against US applicants with adequate GRE/GMAT scores, but inadequate GPAs. Clark stated her opposition to publishing any suggested minimum scores. Brewer argued that not publishing any suggested minimums would leave an international applicant with no idea as to what was necessary to win admission, while a US applicant would have such an idea. Berger suggested leaving suggested minimums to the individual departments.
Pritchett will revise the language of the proposal, incorporating both the GRE and GMAT, for presentation to the Council at a later meeting.
MINUTES OF THE FOURTEENTH MEETING OF THE GRADUATE COUNCIL FOR 1999
Graduate Council Room 1:10-1:50 P.M. November 17, 1999
Next Meeting: January 12, 1:10 P.M.
Members Absent: Rodger, Sartin, Spencer, Weese
Minutes of October 20, 1999, Council meeting were approved.
Brewer moved the approval of 13 appointments and 2 reappointments to the Graduate Faculty. Singh seconded. The motion passed without opposition.
Pritchett reminded the Council of the October 20, 1999, extended discussion on proposed revisions to the proposed Graduate Admissions Policy and summarized the concerns and problems associated with the admission requirements. In an attempt to maintain the spirit of the proposed policy, he proposed modifying the existing language of the policy by moving the GRE/GMAT/TOEFL requirement from item 4 to item 3 and to alter item 3 (now item 4) to the following text:
Sutton moved the approval of the revisions. Szechi seconded. The motion passed with one member voting in opposition.
Winter 2000 Graduate Council Meetings
January 12
January 26
February 9
February 23
March 8
Last modified: November 2, 2016
