University Libraries Logo University Archives of Virginia Tech

Virginia Tech
Governance Minutes Archive

September 23, 1991

 

                                    MINUTES

                      COMMISSION ON UNDERGRADUATE STUDIES

                            President's Board Room

                              September 23, 1991

 

  PRESENT:  Dr. E.F. Carlisle, Chair; Deans J. White, M. Ogliaruso, N.

                Spencer, J. Marchman, R. Purdy, M. Lewis; Drs. C. Shoulders,

                J. Taper, D. Morris, B. Reed, P. Feret, M. Murray, K.

                Eschenmann, Alan McDaniel for L. Geyer; C. Burch-Brown; W.

                Dean, University Registrar; D. Bousquet, Admissions;

 

 

  ABSENT:   Drs. D. E. Egger, M. Deisenroth, R. Daniel, B. Sgro; B. Haddican,

                D. Lubin, M. McGuire, SGA.

 

 

  VISITORS: Elizabeth Guertin

 

 

 

  1.  CALL TO ORDER AND ANNOUNCEMENTS:

      Dr. Carlisle called the meeting to order at 3:10 p.m.

 

  2.  The AGENDA was approved as distributed.

 

  3.  The MINUTES of the April 22, 1991 meeting were approved as corrected.

 

  4.  WELCOME TO NEW AND RETURNING MEMBERS - E. F. Carlisle

 

      After welcoming new and returning members of the commission, Dr.

      Carlisle suggested two major items for consideration by the commission

      for this academic year:

 

      o   Recommendations of the Task Force on Liberal Education

 

      o   General Review of Undergraduate Admissions Policies

 

      Dr. Carlisle indicated that the first item, recommendations of the Task

      Force ("one of the most important undertakings in undergraduate educa-

      tion on this campus") will require several discussions sessions with

      the commission prior to any formal action on its recommendations.  In

      explaining item two, the review of undergraduate admissions policies,

      he offered three reasons.  First, it is quite reasonable for faculty to

      periodically review our policies, especially since the last review was

      in April, 1986.  Second, some faculty questions have been raised, spe-

      cifically in the area of special admissions.  And, third, some changes

      in admissions policies have been suggested.  Dr. Carlisle noted that

      the review should promote some interesting questions -- questions being

      asked by universities in general.  That is, what constitutes quality or

      how do we define the populations in our student body?  Also, what role

      does consideration of special talents and interests have in the admis-

      sions process?

 

      Dr. Carlisle also suggested such additional topics as review of the

      drop deadline policy, discussion of attendance policy (or the lack

      thereof), and issues related to telephone registration.

 

  5.  COURSE CRITERIA COMMITTEE REPORT  - J. White

 

      Dr. White introduced members of the committee and briefly explained its

      charge.

 

      A motion was made and seconded to approve for first reading the Septem-

      ber 23, 1991 report.  The motion CARRIED.  Dr. Marchman moved that the

      commission waive the first reading of the reaffiliation of BME under-

      graduate courses to the Department of Engineering Science and Mechan-

      ics. (ESM)  Motion CARRIED.  A motion was made and seconded to approve

      for second reading the reaffiliation of BME undergraduate courses to

      the Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics.  Motion CARRIED.

 

      BME courses approved for reaffiliation with ESM, effective Spring 1992:

 

      o   BME   3274  Biomedical Instrumentation (no change in course)

      o   BME   4105-4106 Engineering Analysis of Physiological Systems (no

          change in course)

 

      Courses Dropped:

 

      o   BME   3104  Fundamentals in Biomedical Engineering (no change in

          course)

 

  6.  UPDATE, LIBERAL EDUCATION FORUM - C. Burch-Brown

 

      Carol Burch-Brown, Associate Provost for Undergraduate Programs, de-

      tailed for the commission the many different forums being used for dis-

      semination of the draft report.  The purpose of the widespread

      discussion is to allow a majority of the university community an oppor-

      tunity to comment.  Dr. Marchman questioned the lack of specific

      courses in the recommendations.  Professor Burch-Brown responded that

      the charge of the task force was to review structure of the university

      core, not to suggest specific courses.  She suggested that the commis-

      sion determine if the recommendations fit our academic criteria.  If

      they do, then the second stage will be to determine the courses.  Dr.

      Spencer voiced concern regarding implementation of changes prior to

      orientation for the entering class of 1992.  Dr.  Ogliaruso commented

      that the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences feel that the rec-

      ommendations of the forum regarding the elimination of

      clusters/sequences is the undoing of indepth study.  Dr. Carlisle sug-

      gested that the commission invite members of the forum to the next

      scheduled meeting for additional discussion of the draft report.

 

  7.  Meeting adjourned at 4:10 p.m.

 

                                     Respectfully submitted,

 

 

                                     Wanda Hankins Dean

                                     University Registrar

 

 

 

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

URL: http://spec.lib.vt.edu/minutes/cus/1991/September+23++1991.html
Last modified on: Tuesday, 25-Sep-2001 13:57:34 EDT