Graduate Studies Committee Meeting for November 20, 2003

Members Present:                 G. Claffey, R. Cohen, C. Dimmick, J. DiPlacido, K. Farrington, J. Faryniarz, B. Greenfield, R. Kalder, B. Kjell, J. Kovel, C. Marshall, D. Mitchell, D. Mulcahy, J. Nicoll-Senft, M. Nunn, S. Seider

Guests/ex. officio:                  P. Lemma, C. Pudlinski

S. Seider called the Graduate Studies Committee to order at 2:38 pm.  G. Mejia, the current chair of the Graduate Studies Committee was attending an out of state conference.  S. Seider chaired the meeting in Gustavo’s absence.  

Approval of Minutes

A.        Approval of the October 23, 2003 minutes was deferred until the January meeting.

I.                   Announcements from Dean Lemma

A. Undergraduate students have been taking courses at the 400 level, then attempting to use them toward their graduate degree.  Please inform all Graduate advisors that they should check a CCSU transcript to be SURE that the courses that they want to include on a graduate planned program appear on a GRADUATE LEVEL record.  If there are any on the undergraduate transcript, they cannot be counted, unless the student has taken a 500 level course and has the appropriate form signed indicating they wished to not count it for their undergraduate program.

B.     Strategic Plan: P. Lemma presented the Graduate’s School’s draft of priorities to the Planning and Budget Committee on November 17, 2003.  They were drafted from input of those attending the Graduate Forum.  The three major goals were:

1.      Establish a more professional identity and image for the graduate school

2.      Maintain academic integrity by ensuring internal quality control

3.      Support and encourage innovative offerings tailored to meet the needs of the community.

C.     Reminder: If your department has pending files for students for the spring 04 semester, please make decisions and forward the files to Graduate Admissions.

D.     Reminder:  P. Lemma stated that if pre-requisites for graduate level courses are not written correctly on curriculum proposal sheets, it can hamper online registration for the course.  She would like to work with the person who handles department curriculum requests and asks that the forms not be just dropped off.

E.     GSC members were asked to consider nominations of departments for the Graduate Community of Scholars Tribute.  The award will be given at the spring Graduate Forum.

F.      Rejection letter, see Unfinished Business

G.    Reminder:  The Graduate Open House is tonight at 4-7pm in the Student Center, Alumni Hall.

II.                Graduate Student Association

No report. 

III.             Unfinished Business

A.  The Appeals committee had concerns about the wording in the new rejection letter handed out by P. Lemma.  Discussion focused on the second paragraph of the letter

“It is with deepest regret that I inform you of this decision.  However, faculty make decisions of acceptance based on grade point averages, a review of academic records and in some cases additional materials, such as letters of recommendation, test scores, essays, etc.  Therefore, failure to enclose the additional materials or the quality of such materials may be the reason for the rejection.  For advanced specializations where class size, graduate faculty, and campus resources are limited, we are constrained to accept only the most academically qualified students.”

R. Cohen pointed out that “specialization” points to all programs.  He suggested the wording: “Also because of class size, campus resources may be limited….”  P. Lemma felt that this wording could cause a problem, since not may specializations have caps.  G. Claffey pointed out that where there are enrollment caps in the program and this is the cause for non-admittance, then student would be appealing due to the cap.  J. DiPlacido felt that a letter from the department might be in order along with the generic rejection letter.  P. Lemma stressed that certain programs may want to write an additional letter that is more specific to the student, but that the Graduate Studies rejection letter needed to remain generic. 

J. DiPlacido felt that the third sentence makes excuses to the student as to why the student was rejected.   If appeals were a problem, then the student should be encouraged to contact the department directly. She also felt that by informing the student that they have the right to appeal the rejection would encourage more appeals. P. Lemma reminded us that the right to appeal the rejection is for the student’s protection, but even with an appeal the student still might not gain acceptance to the program.  P. Lemma stressed that her office needs to be the first point of contact to help the student, especially since faculty are not always available during the summer months.  M. Nunn suggested that the letter contain a more detailed invitation to the student to contact the Dean’s office with questions.  S. Seider suggested that it might be appropriate for this subject to be taken up by a subcommittee. D. Mulcahy motioned that the wording should be left to the discretion of the Dean’s office.  The motion was seconded and approved.

IV.              Reports from the Committees

A. Curriculum 

J. Kovel requested more volunteers for the Curriculum committee.  J. Nicoll-Senft from the Education department volunteered.  J. Kovel presented the recommendations of the Graduate Studies Curriculum Committee. (Link here to the minutes of the December Agenda.  November 5, 2003 minutes are there http://www.ccsu.edu/curriculum/ )

Item #1: Department of Computer Science – There was no representative at the curriculum meeting.  The recommendation was deferred.

Item #2: Department of Modern Languages - There was no representative at the curriculum meeting.  The recommendation was deferred.

Item #3: Department of Counseling & Family Therapy – Course revision of MF 558.  Approved

Item #4: Department of History – all items recommended for approval.  Approved

Item #5: Department of Manufacturing & Construction Management- all items recommended for approval.  Approved

Item #6: Department of Marketing - There was no representative at the curriculum meeting.  The recommendations were deferred. C. Dimmick moved to recommend the deletion of MKT 460 – Approved

Item #7: Department of Physics – Recommendations approved with amendments

Item #8: Department of Psychology – Recommended cycling change for PSY 430 – Approved.  C. Pudlinski reminded the committee that the Graduate Studies Committee bylaws were changed last year so that the full committee would see all changes, including changes in class cycling. 

B.     Policy

1) S. Seider presented the department of Psychology’s program revision/addition to   the Master of Arts in Psychology program. 

The Psychology department would like to prevent students from taking an excess of courses toward their M.A. degree without first applying to the program.  The department feels that it is reasonable to count a couple of courses that non-matriculated students take toward their M. A. degree, but not more than 6 credits.  This change has no effects on faculty, facilities, equipment, library holdings or computer facilities. 

The current admission policy reads: 

No more than 6 credits at the 400 level, as approved by the graduate advisor, may be counted toward the graduate planned program of study.

Upon deliberation of the proposed revision, the GSC Policy subcommittee passed the following program revision/addition to the current Admission policy:

No more than 6 credits taken at CCSU as a non-matriculated student can be applied to the M.A. degree in Psychology at Central Connecticut State University.

2) The History Department finalized their admissions requirements for the M.A. in History and the M.A. in Public History to require an undergraduate G.P.A. of 3.0 or a cumulative G.P.A. of 3.0.  Applicants will be expected to submit two letters of recommendation, and a statement of interest describing their academic interests in history.  Applicants for the M.A. in Public History should also address their professional goals and career aspirations.

Applicants who do not meet these admission standards, but who have an undergraduate cumulative G.P.A. between 2.70 and 2.99 may be considered for conditional admission.  In ordered to be recommended for full acceptance, conditionally admitted students must complete HIST 501 with a B or better.

M. Nunn moved to accept the changes.  The motion was seconded.  Approved.

C.     Scholarship and Awards

J. Nicoll-Senft reported that the subcommittee met last week.  The academic awards have been voted, but they need to decide on the Outstanding Scholar Awards.  The academic awards have been sent out via email by the Graduate Studies office.

D.    Appeals

G. Claffey reported that there were two appeals voted on.  The Appeals subcommittee voted to agree with the departments

IV.   New Business

                  C. Dimmick reminded the committee that Roberts Rules requires that the term “Old  Business” should be noted on the agenda and in the minutes as “Unfinished Business”.

V.                 Adjournment –3:22 pm

Minutes edited as approved 1/29/2004