University Libraries Logo University Archives of Virginia Tech

Virginia Tech
Governance Minutes Archive

January 16, 1991



                        COMMISSION ON GRADUATE STUDIES

                          16 JANUARY 1991, 3:30 P.M.

                                206 SANDY HALL



  Present: Drs. Brown, Burger, Eaton, Hooper, M. Johnson, R. Johnson,

           LaBerge, Lutze, McCoy, Moore, O'Brien, Snoke, Sporakowski, Stout,

           Mr. Anthony Townsend


  Visitors: Susan Truelove - Spectrum, Marvin Foushee - Registrars





  1.  ANNOUNCEMENTS -  Dr. Hooper stated that a second Graduate School's Open

      Doors Evening will be held today.  This event will be held every Wed-

      nesday for the at least the next several weeks.  An evaluation will be

      done in the future to decide whether this event will continue.


      The agenda was amended to include:


      A handout of a portion of the minutes from the State Council for Higher

      Education will be given to the membership and Dr. Hooper planned brief

      comments on these minutes.


      A handout of a copy of the Sexual Harassment Policy which will include

      brief comments from Dr. Hooper.


      The issue of the proposed new Commission structures.


      These items will be discussed after the report from the Graduate Stu-

      dent Assembly.


      Dr. Hooper also announced that he will be calling on several committees

      to make reports to the Commission.  These include committees examining

      scholarship questions, truth in packaging, and on the revision of the

      graduate student appeal policy.


  2.  Approval of the Agenda - The agenda was approved as amended.


  3.  APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF 5 DECEMBER 1990 -  the minutes were approved as



  4.  GRADUATE STUDENT ASSEMBLY - Tony Townsend announced that the next meet-

      ing of the GSA will be January 17 in Pamplin Hall at 5:00 p.m.


      The Coffee House is still being held.


      The Travel Fund forms have just gone out to delegates for distribution

      and the deadline will be January 31, 1991.


      The housing issue is still under consideration.  Information is being

      compiled from across the country regarding graduate family housing. The

      issue is defining a "family" in such a manner that is acceptable. Also

      the issue of priority placements into family housing program is being



  5.  SEXUAL HARASSMENT POLICY - A handout was distributed of the policy

      which will be considered for implementation.  Dr. Hooper stated that

      clarifications were added into the "Definitions" statement to define

      the areas in which graduate students should be included.


      GSA concerns had been raised regarding exclusion of the Graduate School

      in the "Formal Complaint" section of the resolution.  Dr. Hooper stated

      that the Dean of Students office has a policies and procedures in place

      for such complaints for both undergraduate and graduate students.  He

      is working with that office, to include into their policy, a place for

      the graduate community to become involved.


      Dean Martha Johnson stated that, in the past, the Chief Justice of the

      Honor Court had been included in issues of this sort and asked if this

      was a formal or informal inclusion.  Dr. Hooper stated that he is to

      review the documentation regarding procedures involved in such issues

      and will know more when his review is completed.  Dean Johnson asked

      that, for the record, it be stated that the Chief Justice of the Honor

      System would like to be included on the investigations of such com-



      Dr. Hooper noted two other areas where the term "graduate student" was

      included to clarify that "students" included graduate students as well

      as undergraduate students.


      A point was raised by Mike O'Brien regarding publication of such a pol-

      icy so that all University employees and students would be aware that

      such a policy exists.


      Dr. Hooper stated that, after this statement is passed by University

      Council, documentation will be sent out to all the University community

      for their information.  This statement should also be included in the

      Faculty Handbook as well as University catalogs.



      stated that the final version of the reorganization structure will in-

      clude our previously discussed issues regarding new Commissions for Ac-

      ademic Affairs, combining undergraduate and graduate commissions

      together.  When it comes up, Dr. Hooper will point out that the CGS

      would like to have been included in earlier phases of the discussion.

      One thought that has been brought up is to have a "fall back position",

      rather than have the CGS and the Commission on Research dissolved. One

      option would be to return to a Commission for Research and Graduate



      After discussion between Arthur Snoke and Tony Townsend, Tony suggested

      that Dr. Hooper lobby toward a Commission for Graduate Affairs that

      would actually cover graduate student affairs, academic affairs and any

      other issues related to the graduate community.


      Dr. Snoke noted the undergraduates have the colleges as an intermediary

      between them and the administration.  This doesn't exist for graduate

      students.  The only place to cover issues like this is within the Grad-

      uate School itself and within the Commission.  Dr. Snoke felt that the

      CGS has acted as a liaison on certain issues.


      Dean LaBerge noted that a Commission on Research and Graduate Studies

      would be a better option than combining CGS and CUS.


      Dr. Hooper asked that any further comments be brought to him so he can

      address these issues with the Council.


  7.  "I" GRADE RESOLUTION UPDATE -  Dr. Hooper reminded the Commission that

      discussion had been held and we had approved the idea of reemphasizing

      the policy that exists about "I" grades.


      Dr. Snoke stated that the issue could be reemphasized by clarifying the

      area in the graduate catalog regarding the "I" grades.  He also stated

      he felt that it would be more appropriate to have the undergraduate and

      graduate statements to agree regarding the "I" unaffecting the QCA.


      He further felt that the resolution that was agreed on by the Faculty

      Senate should be jointly reviewed by each of the two Commissions (CUS

      and CGS) and then should be approved contingent upon the approval of

      each group.  A subcommittee has been set up by the CUS to review this



      Dr. Hooper stated that he felt that there should be no further delays

      in sending this issue forward to the Council.  He felt that if we

      didn't go forward with this issue we are further exposing graduate stu-

      dents to have their QCAs lowered unnecessarily which will affect other

      aspects of their studies.


      After discussion, Dr. Hooper stated that we could either go ahead with

      a policy clarification or change and at the same time express our in-

      terest in getting to the University wide practice.  If, in checking, we

      find that this can be handled without a policy resolution we will han-

      dle making the necessary clarifications.


      Dr. Burger stated that he felt that the CUS should go ahead with their

      studies of this issue as it meets the needs of the undergraduate stu-

      dents and that we should go ahead with our ideas for the graduate stu-



      Dr. Hooper asked if the CGS would be comfortable with asking to join

      the CUS and have a joint committee for consideration of the issue.


      The commission membership felt that we should take the lead and submit

      the information as presented today.


      Tony Townsend moved that the CGS endorses the Resolution 1990-91A of

      the Faculty Senate with the understanding that it will affirm that the

      "I" grade will not be counted as a grade.


      The motion was approved with 6 votes in favor, 3 votes against and 1



  8.  POLICY ON MINIMUM TOEFL SCORE - A letter was distributed from Dr.

      Donald McKeon regarding interpretation of TOEFL scores.  Dr.  Eaton

      stated that we require a 600 TOEFL and some departments require spe-

      cific scores before reviewing an application.  What we propose is that

      we have a committee study this issue.  Basically, the Graduate School

      recommends 550 minimum score.  Dr. LaBerge suggested that the committee

      review minimum sub-score as well.  Dr. Eaton stated that the letter was

      basically for information purposes and he suggested that Dr. Hooper re-

      fer this issue to a sub-committee of the CGS.  Dr. Hooper referred the

      issue to the Degree Requirements, Standards, Criteria and Academic Pol-

      icies Committee and asked that Dr. LaBerge meet with them to acquaint

      them with various issues involved in the TOEFL.



      tributed for informational purposes.


  10. PROFESSIONAL PRACTICES INSTITUTE - copies of the proposal were distrib-

      uted to the membership for their review.  Dr. Hooper stated that the

      Professional Practices Institute a proposal developed to allow certain

      activities that aren't basic or applied research to still take place

      with the involvement with faculty in other parts of the University com-

      munity. It would stand alone next to the University as does VTIP and

      the Corporate Research Center as related to the University but separate

      corporate entities.  It would be given the mission of taking on the ac-

      tivities that our faculty might still want to be involved with but

      aren't appropriate for the research division and that industry would

      rather contract out than do in-house.  This proposal provides the ra-

      tionale for this and the history of this idea.


      This item will be a carryover for our next meeting for discussion.




      MENCEMENT - Dean Martha Johnson distributed two handouts:  (1) Recomm-

      endations and report from the adhoc committee and (2) Last years

      commencement program.


      The adhoc committee consists of: Janette Bowkler, Jack Duke, Don

      Mullins and Martha Johnson.


      The committee felt that the the December hooding exercise by the major

      professor was impressive and therefore they are making the recommenda-

      tion that the doctoral ceremony be changed to include the hooding.  One

      thing they took into consideration was the fact that this would make

      the ceremony longer. The ceremony will have to begin at 4:30 to accom-

      modate the hooding and be out of the coliseum in time for the Vet

      School ceremonies to begin. Also more marshalls will be needed and more

      printed instructions for the students.


      The committee recommended that all major professors that the student

      may have be involved in the hooding ceremony.  As a result of this,

      guidelines must be set to determine whether all co-chairs hood the stu-

      dent at the same time.


      The committee recommends that an academic person be selected as speaker

      for the doctoral ceremony.


      Following the ceremony, a reception will be held in tents outside

      Cassell Coliseum.


      The committee report was accepted.


  12. ADJOURNMENT - 5:12 p.m.


                                     Respectfully submitted,





                                     John L. Eaton





Current Virginia Tech Governance Minutes Archive

Return to Virginia Tech Governance Minutes Archive

VT History | Digital Library and Archives | Special Collections | University Archives

Send questions or comments to:

Tamara Kennelly, University Archivist
University Libraries
Virginia Tech
P.O. Box 90001
Blacksburg, VA, 24062-9001

Last modified on: Tuesday, 25-Sep-2001 13:57:19 EDT