View in portable document format.

4839 DOCUMENTS OF THE GENERAL FACULTY Following are the minutes of the regular Faculty Council meeting of May 8, 2006. Sue Alexander Greninger, Secretary The General Faculty and Faculty Council MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL FACULTY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 8, 2006 The eighth regular meeting of the Faculty Council for the academic year 2005-2006 was held in the Main Building, Room 212, Monday, May 8, 2006, at 2:30 p.m. ATTENDANCE. Present: Christopher J. Bell, Susan N. Beretvas, Gary D. Borich, Douglas C. Burger, Virginia G. Burnett, Luis A. Caffarelli, Linda J. Carpenter, Penelope Davies, Gustavo A. De Veciana, Diana M. DiNitto, John S. Dzienkowski, Miriam Estrin, Linda Ferreira-Buckley, Sherry L. Field, Amy D. Forestell, Patricia K. Galloway, Linda V. Gerber, Linda L. Golden, Michael H. Granof, Sue A. Greninger, Ian F. Hancock, Martha F. Hilley, David M. Hillis, Lori K. Holleran, Karrol A. Kitt, Robert C. Koons, Desiderio Kovar, Nancy P. Kwallek, Desmond F. Lawler, Raul L. Madrid, Richard P. Meier, Julia Mickenberg, Karl H. Miller, Joan A. Mullin, John H. Murphy, Kate Nanney, Melissa L. Olive, Jon E. Olson, Alba A. Ortiz, Cynthia Osborne Blaha, Yolanda C. Padilla, Thomas G. Palaima, Elizabeth C. Pomeroy, Kenneth M. Ralls, John H. Richburg, Peter J. Riley, Gretchen Ritter, Bonnie P. Rust, Berkley B. Scroggins, Janet Staiger, Jeffrey Vaaler, Stacy Wolf, Sharon L. Wood, Paul B. Woodruff, Patrick Woolley. Absent: Kamran Ali (excused), Urton L. Anderson (excused), Efraim P. Armendariz, Joanna M. Brooks, Lorenzo F. (Frank) Candelaria, Lisa J. Cary (excused), Marcos S. Ceniceros, Stanislav Emelianov, Oscar Gonzalez, Edmund (Ted) Gordon, Charles R. Hale, Kenneth J. Hale (excused), David Justin, Klaus O. Kalthoff (excused), Dominic L. Lasorsa (excused), Wayne Lesser, Randall M. Parker, Wayne Rebhorn, Danielle R. Rugoff, Christine E. Schmidt (excused), Paul R. Shapiro, Janice S. Todd (excused), John M. Weinstock. Voting Members: 41 present 34 absent 75 total. Non-Voting Members: 7 present 26 absent 33 total. Total Members: 48 present 60 absent 108 total. 4840 I. REPORT OF THE SECRETARY. The written report appears in D 4783-4791. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. The minutes of the Faculty Council meeting of April 17, 2006 (D 4792-4815) were approved by voice vote. III. COMMUNICATION WITH THE PRESIDENT. A. Comments by the President. President Powers announced that dean searches were not underway in the College of Education and the School of Information as had been erroneously reported in the Daily Texan. He reported that personnel in the McCombs School of Business, central Information Technology unit, and senior administration had been working diligently to address the computer security breech at the McCombs school by notifying individuals whose information was compromised and getting the “immediate situation well under control.” President Powers congratulated and thanked Professor Alba Ortiz (special education) for the “terrific job” she had done this year as chair of the Faculty Council; he described her leadership as both “effective and influential.” B. Questions to the President – None. IV. REPORT OF THE CHAIR. Chair elect Linda Golden (marketing administration) presented Chair Ortiz with inscribed gifts of appreciation on behalf of the Faculty Council for her outstanding leadership, and the Faculty Council thanked Chair Ortiz with a hearty round of applause. Chair Ortiz said she appreciated the gratitude, but the work had been a team effort. She then thanked individually members of the Faculty Council Executive Committee and UT administrators who meet regularly to discuss issues of importance to the University and to determine the agendas for Faculty Council meetings. She also thanked members of the Faculty Council for their dedication and support during the past year and gave special recognition to personnel in the Office of the General Faculty and Faculty Council for their behind-the-scenes work. V. REPORT OF THE CHAIR ELECT. A. Report on election results from the special 2006-2007 Faculty Council meeting. Chair elect Linda Golden thanked all of the candidates for their willingness to serve in a leadership capacity for next year’s Faculty Council and announced the election results. Professor Douglas C. Burger (computer sciences) will serve as chair elect of the Faculty Council in 2006-2007. Members of the Faculty Council Executive Committee will include Professor Cynthia Osborne Blaha (public affairs), representing the Faculty Advisory Committee on Budgets; Professor David M. Hillis (integrative biology), representing the Educational Policy Committee; and Professor Martha F. Hilley (music), representing the Faculty Welfare Committee. VI. UNFINISHED BUSINESS. A. Revised motion from the Educational Policy Committee to change the definition of University Honors (D 4779-4780). Professor Robert C. Koons (philosophy and committee member) presented a revised motion allowing students to qualify for University Honors in their final semester before graduation when they need to enroll for fewer than eleven credit hours to graduate. For eligibility under this provision, students must (1) have a cumulative in-residence grade point average (GPA) of 3.5 or greater in all courses taken prior to the current semester, (2) earned a GPA of at least 3.5 in 4841   A. courses completed in residence in the current semester, and (3) have no incomplete grades (symbol X) in any course taken in residence. Professor Larry Abraham (curriculum & instruction) said the revised motion was an improvement, but he questioned why a student who did not need to take a full load in the final semester would be held to a standard of cumulative performance across his or her entire program of study when University Honors is generally awarded on a semester-by-semester basis. Professor Koons responded that the committee was trying to avoid the situation where a student could qualify for honors in the final semester before graduation by taking only one easy course and earning an A in it. He said committee members thought the most natural criteria would be the cumulative GPA and the GPA of that semester. Professor Abraham said he disagreed and proposed an amendment to replace the wording “have a cumulative in-residence GPA of 3.5 or greater in all courses taken prior to the current semester” with the following new wording: “earned University Honors in the immediately preceding two long semesters.” Questions raised by Mr. Mike Allen (interim registrar) and Professor Karl Miller (history) provided Professor Abraham with the opportunity to clarify that the two semesters did not have to be contiguous. Chair Ortiz called for the vote and the motion as amended by Professor Abraham passed by voice vote. B. Report of the Task Force on Curricular Reform. 1. Summary of feedback. Chair Ortiz reported that Chair elect Golden and her teaching assistant, Sandra Dunn, had summarized feedback from the University and college/school forums and concluded the task was difficult because much of the feedback pertained to issues specific to each respective institutional unit. Chair Ortiz then reported that the following general themes had emerged across the various forums: a. Attention needs to be focused on the entire undergraduate curriculum and not just on the core curriculum. b. Instead of a one-size-fits-all approach, it is important to look for a variety of proposals that meet the goals of curricular reform and allow for flexibility, particularly with regard to transfer students, students who have earned advanced placement credit, and faculty in colleges and schools where participation in the core requirements would be restricted due to commitment overload and limited resources. c. A “common educational experience” for undergraduates needs to be defined and used to develop specific reform recommendations; some faculty members feel that a common experience of large signature classes is not what the task force meant. d. Examination of curricular reform at comparable institutions is needed to learn what has worked and to help avoid the problems other institutions have encountered. e. Strong sentiment exists for conducting an inventory of programs and resources on campus and building on existing endeavors, such as Connexus, the Bridging Disciplines Program, and Freshman Interest Groups. f. Incentives need to be developed to encourage faculty participation in enhancing the undergraduate experience, such as increasing teaching load credit for courses taught in the core curriculum, providing summer support for course development, and enhancing faculty skills for creating signature courses. g. Since faculty in colleges/schools that will be greatly affected by reform measures supported the minority report included with the task force’s report, careful consideration should be given to the recommendations included in the minority report. Chair Ortiz then outlined the following specific recommendations that emerged from the various forums: a. The concept of signature courses was generally supported but not as described in the task force’s report; major concerns were the proposed large lecture class format, heavy reliance on teaching assistant support, and high implementation costs. b. Signature course recommendations included defining the features or criteria for such courses and finding ways to broaden the definition so that a variety of courses could 4842       qualify. Another idea was that signature courses should be offered but not mandated, especially if courses within colleges/schools met the intended content as defined by the signature course concept. c. The concepts of flags and strands received support and were the least controversial among the reform recommendations; feedback dealt primarily with the areas that should be flagged and the number of required flags for each area, with the area of science and technology receiving limited discussion and delineation. d. Requiring deferral of major declaration to sophomore year was not supported, primarily due to concern about losing top students to other institutions that do not impose suc requirements. e. Deferral alternatives that were generally supported included (1) providing specific support for students who have not yet declared their majors and (2) allowing students to hold “dual citizenship;” this would allow students to declare their majors but still utilize the services provided by an entity like University College. f. Although there is a strong consensus that student advising needs to be improved, there is a division on how to best accomplish this; a recurring recommendation is to review the history of the Undergraduate Advising Center to assess if such a unit needs to be re-established or to determine if increasing the number of advisors in the colleges/schools would better serve student needs. g. Advising related to the core curriculum and advising within colleges/schools needs to be coordinated to prevent confusing and conflicting advice; guidance, however is needed throughout a student’s entire program of study. h. With regard to the organizational structure, establishing a guardian of the core curriculum and providing a support system for undeclared majors were both perceived as being important; however, the University College concept was not widely seen as an appropriate structure to meet these needs. i. There appears to be a good deal of interest in the possible establishment of a vice provost and dean of undergraduate studies that would be comparable to the positions that provide oversight for graduate studies here at UT Austin. However, there is some concern that such a position needs to be responsible for oversight of both the core curriculum and major requirements within colleges/schools for reform measures to be effective. j. There is little debate regarding the need for increased resources, but there is strong feedback that realistic cost estimates need to be developed and considered in making decisions about each of the specific reform proposals. k. There is strong sentiment that the top priority be given to hiring additional faculty in order to decrease the faculty/student ratio and to enhance the undergraduate experience; considerable feedback was received about insufficient faculty and teaching assistant support for currently existing curricular needs within many departments. 2. Next steps. Chair Ortiz reported that the Faculty Council Executive Committee has charged the Educational Policy Committee through its chair, Professor Archie Holmes (electrical and computer engineering) to accomplish the following over the summer months: a. Review the available feedback, and obtain additional information in order to develop specific legislative recommendations regarding curricular reform for consideration by the Faculty Council. b. Provide feedback regarding the administrative and organizational recommendations contained in the task force’s proposal since curriculum implementation will be influenced by structural issues. Although the Faculty Council does not have authority regarding the administrative and organizational proposals recommended in the task force’s report, Chair Ortiz said the Faculty Council Executive Committee had agreed to serve as a working group this summer to review the recommendations and feedback regarding way-finding/advising, University College, and resources. She said the Executive Committee’s intent was to either endorse the 4843     recommendations or provide alternative proposals for Faculty Council debate so that a clear set of faculty perspectives could be provided to administrators as they make those decisions. Chair Ortiz reported efforts this summer on behalf of the Faculty Council would be coordinated with the Deans’ Working Committee on Curricular Reform, which is chaired by Dean Steve W. Leslie (pharmacy). She then introduced Dean Leslie and asked him to talk about the purpose and plans of his committee. Dean Leslie said that there had been an effective, efficient, and engaging transitional process occurring in Deans’ Council meetings with President Powers and Provost Ekland-Olson regarding curricular reform. He reported that in the first two of three meetings of the Deans’ Council since the new president was named the group had discussed issues and begun to frame ideas and concepts about how to move forward with curricular reform. In the third meeting, the deans unanimously recommended the establishment of the Deans’ Working Committee on Curricular Reform, which President Powers and Provost Ekland-Olson then initiated. He said he was delighted to chair the committee, whose purpose was to identify and prepare an inventory and assessment of available courses and resources within colleges/schools for potential interdisciplinary signature courses, strands, and flags. He said each dean had assigned an individual with a comprehensive understanding of the undergraduate curriculum in his or her respective college/school to the working committee. In most cases, the representative is an associate dean of either academic or undergraduate affairs or a department chair. He said, although his committee was not certain what the Faculty Council would ultimately recommend, he thought it was important for his committee to partner with the Faculty Council as recommendations regarding curricular reform were being developed. He said his committee had not been formed to engage in policy or structure decisions, but he hoped the committee would provide good ideas about what might be possible in terms of implementation and what should be avoided. He said the idea was to form a partnership between the administration and the Faculty Council, and for his committee to provide useful content knowledge for fundamental decisions as the process develops and to identify potential pilot courses that could be implemented. Dean Leslie said he did not think the process should be rushed, but it should be purposeful and attempt to accomplish a good deal of work over the summer. He said he was looking forward to working with the Faculty Council this summer and during the following year. Chair Ortiz said Provost Ekland-Olson had worked closely with Faculty Council officers and provided input in how to proceed with the recommendations. She said that the intent was for all the groups to coordinate efforts and to build on the work of the Task Force on Curricular Reform. She then thanked Dean Leslie and said she was looking forward to working with him as the process moves forward. VII. REPORTS OF THE GENERAL FACULTY, COLLEGES AND SCHOOLS, AND COMMITTEES. A. Clarification of the affiliated studies coursework and residency requirements in the University chapter in the Undergraduate Catalog, 2006-2008 (D 4818-4819). Professor Jacqueline Woolley (psychology and chair of the Committee on Undergraduate Degree Program Review) presented the motion from her committee to clarify requirements regarding coursework and residency for the affiliated studies program. She asked that Mr. John Sunnygard, director of the Center for Global Educational Opportunities in the International Office, be allowed to answer questions regarding the proposed catalog wording about the proposed requirements. Mr. Mike Allen questioned whether the breadth of the phrase, “approved affiliated study abroad credit toward all other residency requirements” in the proposal would conflict with the tuition rebate program that requires a student be a Texas resident at the time of enrollment in order to qualify for the rebate. Saying he did not believe colleges have purview over allowing affiliated studies to meet the tuition rebate residency requirements, Mr. Allen urged that the 4844     proposal’s wording be modified. Director Sunnygard said that course equivalency and University approval of study abroad courses are determined by the appropriate academic units and not by his center. He emphasized that the center was primarily concerned that students not be discouraged or discriminated against for having studied abroad while enrolled at UT. In addition, the center wanted to have residency requirements treated consistently as though they are completed here at UT regardless of the country in which the study abroad experience occurred. He said a fair amount of overlap occurred between universities such that coursework in an affiliated or exchange program could actually be identical. In addition, he said some institutions, such as the London School of Economics, will only allow UT to operate with an affiliate status basis, which can result in a student falling behind according to some residency requirements. In order to encourage study abroad enrollment, Director Sunnygard said it was important that programs approved for credit by UT be considered as completed in residence for degree requirements and the requirements be consistent throughout the process. Mr. Allen said he agreed with Mr. Sunnygard to the extent that academic units have control over residency requirements; however, he said he understood academic units could not remove the state’s legal requirement that coursework be taken as a Texas resident in order to qualify for the tuition rebate. Mr. Allen said a specific situation had arisen that dealt with this issue, and he felt the current wording was too broad and needed to be clarified. Professor Larry Abraham commented that he thought whether a person is considered a Texas resident is a separate issue from whether the course he or she is taking is in residence. When he recommended that the proposal might need to be sent back to the committee, Chair Ortiz said that action was needed on the proposal at the present time due to the undergraduate catalog deadline and gave permission to Vice Provost Lucia Gilbert to address the Council. Vice Provost Gilbert recommended that the following words be eliminated from section two of the requirements: “the appropriate academic units have the discretion to determine applicability of University-approved affiliated study abroad credit toward all college- and school-specific requirements for coursework in residence.” When Mr. Allen said he thought the problem was that affiliated studies coursework is recorded as transfer work, Vice Provost Gilbert said she thought some affiliate coursework comes in as transfer credit and some comes in as a grade. In the latter case, she said students generally gain permission in advance regarding course equivalency, and the course then gets a UT course number and is assigned a grade. Mr. Sunnygard said the interpretations of Vice Provost Gilbert and Mr. Allen both were correct. He clarified that courses are evaluated and can be awarded a UT course equivalent. In the case of affiliate programs, the courses come in as transfer credit, and the grade appearing on the transcript is not included in the student’s GPA. If the student has participated in an exchange program or a faculty-led program aboard, the course grade appears on the transcript and is calculated in the GPA. For affiliated courses, the grade posting is done by the Graduate and International Admissions Center; for exchange courses, the posting is done by the registrar’s office. Saying that the wording was awkward in the state legislation regarding the tuition rebate, Mr. Sunnygard said he believed the legislation required Texas residency so funds would not be returned to non-Texans. He said he thought the primary issue of concern was a student’s residency status within the University, and he did not want the tuition rebate issue to hold up every other student participating in a study abroad program. Mr. Allen said he fully supported the concept of affiliated courses meeting degree and graduation requirements with respect to being defined as resident courses; however, his understanding of the rebate requirement was that the student must have attempted all coursework at a Texas public institution of higher education. Therefore, he thought the fact that affiliated coursework was recorded as transfer credit rather than being taken at a Texas public education institution would cause a problem. When Vice President Patti Ohlendorf (institutional relations and legal affairs) asked Mr. Allen if the wording “college and school specific requirements for coursework in residence” were substituted for “other residency requirements” would solve the problem, Mr. Allen said yes. Chair Ortiz clarified that the last paragraph of the motion would read as follows: Additional requirements imposed by a college or school, if any, are given in the college’s chapter of this catalog. Many degree plans include residence 4845     rules in addition to the above University-wide requirements; the appropriate academic units have the discretion to determine applicability of University-approved affiliated study abroad credit toward all college- and school-specific requirements for coursework in residence. Course equivalency and University approval of study abroad courses are determined by the appropriate academic units. When Professor Desmond Lawler (civil, architectural, environmental engineering) asked why Vice Provost Gilbert’s suggestion to delete the part of the sentence following the semi-colon would not work just as well, Vice President Ohlendorf replied that either could work. She said if few questions were asked in the future about college and school requirements, Vice Provost Gilbert’s suggestion to eliminate the wording after the semi-colon would be fine. However, if a number of questions were anticipated in the future, Vice President Ohlendorf said it would be better to have language similar to her own suggested wording. Professor Lawler asked for permission for Ms. Heather Thompson, program coordinator of the Center for Global Educational Opportunities, to address the Council. Ms. Thompson said the lack of specific wording had been an issue for personnel in the colleges/schools for some time and the inclusion of the specific wording recommended by Vice President Ohlendorf would solve the problem. Professor Lawler moved that the original motion be amended by substituting “college and school specific requirements for coursework in residence” for “other residency requirements” as recommended by Vice President Ohlendorf. Professor Martha Hilley (music) seconded the motion. There being no further questions or discussion, Chair Ortiz called for the vote, and the amendment passed by voice vote. She then called for the vote on the main motion as amended and the motion passed by voice vote. B. Addition of an International Nutrition Option to the Bachelor of Science in Nutrition in the College of Natural Sciences Chapter of the Undergraduate Catalog, 2006-2008 (D 4759-4761). Professor Jeanne Freeland-Graves (human ecology) presented the rationale underlying the need for the addition of an international nutrition option to the Bachelor of Science in Nutrition because a protest had been filed against the proposal by College of Natural Sciences (CNS) Associate Dean for Academic Affairs Jack Gilbert (chemistry and biochemistry). Professor Freeland-Graves reported that the intent of the degree option was to increase knowledge-related programs and government standards as well as health care research issues in countries outside the U.S. and to prepare students who are seeking to focus their education on the global aspects of nutrition. She said the coursework included in the proposal had not been protested. She thought this was because the coursework provided a firm foundation in nutrition education that was grounded in the natural sciences, knowledge of the international dimensions of nutrition and specialization in a major world region/second language, and additional international grounding through support courses. Professor Freeland-Graves said the essential component that had been protested was the requirement that students go to an international location as part of the program of study. Pointing out that other programs, including international business and European studies, have such a requirement, she said the international field experience was needed so students could learn first-hand about nutrition in other societies. She said she understood that eliminating the required travel would make the degree option less expensive and therefore available to more students. Although she thought it possible to use UT’s resources (libraries, internet, international faculty members and students), she said such learning experiences would not provide students the same level of contact and experience in meeting people from other countries and learning how they act and feel. She said travel abroad allows students to learn that their assumptions are not always valid about other cultures. In addition, she said going to another country provides students with opportunities for maturation and encourages them to recognize that they are citizens of the world. Regarding the additional costs, Professor Freeland-Graves noted that different rates of tuition and fees are charged for different programs across campus. In addition, she said the initial program for 4846     this summer had funding for scholarships from three sources: the CNS dean and the UT provost, tuition funds, and the University Co-op. She said ten of the thirteen enrollees were receiving financial aid and others would receive parental support. In the future, she said the CNS dean would actively search for an endowment to help support the program. Associate Dean Gilbert said he had not focused that much on the financial aspects in his protest and felt study abroad had great value for students. However, he said his reasons for protesting pertained to the educational substance of the program and the proposed coursework. Saying he thought the University committee had reviewed an incorrect version of the proposed course layout, Associate Dean Gilbert said his primary concern was that the proposed study-abroad field experience did not have sufficient prerequisites both from within the major and from ancillary supportive courses outside the CNS to adequately prepare students. He said he felt the proposal had not been well thought out and had been rushed through the review process in order to make the catalog deadline. Professor Freeland-Graves said there had been one nutrition faculty member who protested the proposal. As a result, a two and one half hour meeting of the nutrition faculty was held on Friday afternoon before the Committee on Undergraduate Degree Program Review (CUDPR) met the following Monday morning. She reported that the nutrition faculty vote on the proposal had been twelve in favor, one against, and one abstention. She said there had been an error regarding the prerequisites for Nutrition 360 (International Nutrition) in an initial document, but it had been corrected with the help of CNS Associate Dean for Undergraduate Studies David Laudeand his staff. She said that all enrollees in this summer’s initial study abroad program will have completed (1) Nutrition 311 (Introduction to Nutrition) and (2) Nutrition 360 (International Nutrition) or will have completed instructor-provided readings that are comparable to those required in Nutrition 360. In addition, Professor Freeland-Graves said she was planning to administer an oral exam on the first day of the study abroad course this summer. When Associate Dean Gilbert asked if the proposal voted on by the nutrition faculty had been approved by the departmental curriculum committee and the chairman of the Department of Human Ecology before being sent to the CNS, Professor Freeland-Graves replied that the chair of the departmental curriculum committee had been present at the nutrition faculty meeting. Associate Dean Laude asked Chair Ortiz if he could address the Faculty Council, and permission was granted. He said the international nutrition option had proceeded through appropriate procedures up to the CNS’s course and curriculum committee. Following a vote in human ecology, he said Professor Freeland-Graves had given a presentation on the proposal to the CNS’s course and curriculum committee where it was met with numerous questions regarding access and substance regarding the international experience. He said Professor Freeland-Graves had worked on the proposal, met with committees in human ecology, and then presented the proposal again to the CNS’s course and curriculum committee where it received a unanimous vote of approval. The proposal was then approved by Dean Mary Ann Rankin, who supports the option but could not attend the Faculty Council meeting because she was out of town. Associate Dean Laude said, as a chemist, he felt he should defer the determination of what constitutes a first-rate nutrition degree to the department and nutrition division faculty, and he thought the twelve to one faculty vote indicated this was a “fine degree.” Associate Dean Gilbert said he though his past experience as interim chair of the Department of Human Ecology allowed him to assess the pre-study abroad coursework required of students in the proposed option, which he pointed out was not really a degree but an option within a degree. He said he thought his experience allowed him to compare the proposed requirements to those of the UTeach program or the nutrition internship included in the coordinated program in dietetics. He said he thought there were a good many other courses in the nutritional science division that could (1) augment the two prerequisites for the study abroad field experience and (2) provide students a firm scientific background that would enhance the study abroad experience. He said the proposed option would be setting a precedent in the CNS regarding study abroad programs, and he thought it was important for the option to be well thought out. 4847     Associate Dean Laude reiterated that he felt the nutrition faculty should ultimately make the decision regarding the background required before a student enrolls in the field experience. He said the science background required for this degree option was first rate since it included calculus, a year and one half of biology, and a year of each of the following: chemistry, organic chemistry, and biochemistry. He said these requirements, plus the nutrition coursework and the field experience, would provide a well-rounded set of experiences for students in the new option. Professor Freeland-Graves said flexibility with regard to the study abroad experience was a goal since it would be good if students could go to multiple locations during their program of study. Following discussion by the two associate deans about the number of semesters required in organic chemistry within the proposed degree option, it was determined two semesters were required as indicated in the proposal distributed to Council members. Associate Dean Laude said that fitting the international field experience into a student’s program of study would be a challenge given all of the other requirements. He concluded by saying he believed the flexibility offered in the option’s course plan was essential. After the question was called, a motion to stop discussion of the issue was approved by voice vote. Chair Ortiz then called for the vote on the proposal to add an international nutrition option to the Bachelor of Science in Nutrition degree. Following questions from Council members, Chair Ortiz clarified that the proposal under consideration for the vote was the version submitted to Council members as part of the meeting agenda and posted on the Faculty Council Web site. The motion passed by voice vote. VIII. NEW BUSINESS. A. Cancellation of summer meetings of the Faculty Council (D 4781). Chair Ortiz presented a motion to cancel Faculty Council meetings scheduled during the summer months. The motion passed by voice vote. B. Approval of meeting dates 2006-2007 (D 4782). September 18 March 19 October 16 April 16 November 20 May 7 December 11 June 18 January 22 July 16 February 19 August 20 The motion passed by voice vote. C. Nominations for Intercollegiate Athletics Councils (D 4628-4629). Chair Ortiz moved that the following panels of faculty members nominated by the Faculty Council Executive Committee for appointment by President Powers in 2006 to the Intercollegiate Athletics Councils be approved. The Intercollegiate Athletics Council for Men nominees are the following: John C. (Jack) Gilbert, professor, chemistry and biochemistry Edmund (Ted) Gordon, associate professor, anthropology Karrol A. Kitt, associate professor, human ecology Michael L. Lauderdale, professor, social work Janet Staiger, professor, radio-television-film The Intercollegiate Athletics Council for Women nominees are the following: Isabella Cunningham, professor, advertising Paula C. Murray, professor, information, risk and operations Linda E. Reichl, professor, physics Brian E. Roberts, professor, government Helena Woodard, associate professor, English 4848     The motion passed by voice vote. IX. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND COMMENTS. X. QUESTIONS TO THE CHAIR —None. XI. ADJOURNMENT. Chair Ortiz adjourned the meeting at 3:57 p.m. Distributed through the Faculty Council Web site on June 28, 2006. Transcripts of the Faculty Council meetings and copies of these minutes are available on request from the Office of the General Faculty, WMB 2.102, F9500.