Minutes of the UW-L Academic Program Review (APR) Committee Meeting
Wednesday, September 21, 2005, 8:00 a.m.
Room 432 Carl Wimberly Hall

Present:  Tammy Fisher, Carla Graham, Mike Hoffman, Paul Keaton, Gary Konas, Robert Krajewski, Haixia Lan
Absent:  Georges Cravins, Jasmine Saros
Representative from the Office of Vice-Chancellor/Provost: Betsy Morgan

1.      The meeting was called to order at 8:05 A. M. by Convener Carla Graham. 

2.      Betsy Morgan distributed copies of the basic documents of the committee, described the procedure of the review, and introduced (a) a revised timeline/calendar for the committee and (b) some changes to the Unit Data Sheet. She asked the committee to consider voting on both during the meeting.

3.      Convener Carla Graham led the discussion and the vote on the timeline and the changes to the data sheet; Paul Keaton made the motion to endorse both; Haixia Lan seconded the motion; and the committee voted for the endorsement.

4.      Carla solicited nominations for a committee chair and nominated Haixia, who was elected chair.

5.      After brief self-introductions, Haixia explained that according to the APR process by the Senate, each U/D/P (unit, department, or program) has about two years to conduct the self-study and the committee has about 2-3[1] months to write the review. She also emphasized the importance of observing the format in writing the review and of meeting with, prior to finalizing the review, the representatives of the department being reviewed.

6.                  Committee members signed up for reviewing the upcoming reports as follows:

o       English: Georges Cravins, Mike Hoffman

o       Psychology: Tammy Fisher, Paul Keaton

o       Educational Studies: Carla Graham, Jasmine Saros

o       Ess: physical education, teacher certification, & graduate: Haixia Lan, Robert Krajewski

o       Chemistry: Gary Konas, Mike Hoffman

7.                  Issues for the upcoming year: revise APR guidelines

o       “Improving specificity and clarity, including assessment of student learning outcomes, processes involved (e.g., how to ask for a deferment, what is the difference between deferment and delay).” (Committee Charge for 2005-2006 Academic Year—Faculty Senate)

o       Discussing possible ways to encourage and help U/D/P to be on schedule with the self-study

8.      As a group, the committee will meet some time during the semester to discuss these issues. Subcommittees will meet after self-study reports have been submitted. Chair should participate in the meetings subcommittee members hold with the representatives of the department being reviewed.

9.      The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 A. M.

Haixia Lan, recorder


 

[1] Please note an important correction: At the meeting, Haixia said incorrectly that it was 3-4 months.