Minutes of the April 2008 Faculty Meeting

 

I. Call to Order

The President called the meeting to order. With the college pastors off campus, he invited Professor Todd Nichol to offer a prayer.

II. Opening Prayer

Prof. Nichol led a prayer of gratitude for the day and for our work at the College. He asked on behalf of the faculty for “charitable spirits” and for help in making decisions.

III. Approval of the Minutes of the March 2008 Faculty Meeting

The minutes were approved.

IV. Remarks by the President

A. Enrollment . The President reported that more applicants have accepted St. Olaf’s offer of admission than last year at this time. May 1 st is national decision day. In the meantime, the President asked again for everyone’s assistance in recruiting next year’s class.

B. Annual Fund. The College’s 100-million dollar budget requires that 3.7 million comes from the annual fund. In terms of total funds, we are13 % ahead of where we were last year at this time. We are 3% ahead in terms of participation. The size of the average gift has gone up, which is promising, but the outcome remains to be seen, he noted.

C. Travel. The President has been traveling around the country. With the help of the people in Advancement, he has been identifying and meeting people who will likely be the major donors and future Regents of the College. The President was pleased to report that these future Regents, if elected, would bring diversity by race and gender, intellectual credentials, passion for the College, and resources.

D. Concluding Remarks. The President acknowledged that the end of the semester is a stressful time for everyone and encouraged us all to be sensitive to this.

V. Consent Agenda

Currcomm 0708-07 , proposed revisions to major in Social Studies Education, David Booth

Currcomm 0708-09 , new psychology course, David Booth

The faculty voted to approve the consent agenda.

VI. Committee Reports and New Business

A. RPC, Dan Hofrenning

Prof. Hofrenning reported that RPC has little remaining on the agenda for the rest of the year. One remaining item concerns part-time appointments. One motion for this meeting is RPC 0708-04, Curriculum Committee Subcommittees. Last spring, several committees were abolished and two new ones were created. Hofrenning explained that the sub-committees created along with the new committees are no longer optimal. The motion proposes to strike the sub-committees from the faculty manual in order to allow the new committees to formulate their own sub-committee structure as they see fit.

The President called for a vote on the motion. The faculty approved the motion.

B. Curriculum Committee, David Booth

Prof. Booth reported that the work of re-certification of general education attributes continues. He asked that departments continue to regard this work as important and vital to our curriculum.

1. Currcomm 0708-08 , proposed revisions to major in Studio Art, David Booth

Booth made a friendly amendment: remove two courses in photography from category “two dimensional media” and place them under “new media.”

The faculty approved the motion

2. Currcomm 0708-06 , intended learning outcomes in FOL, David Booth

Matt Rohn, questioned the meaning of “language proficiency commensurate with the amount of study,” and whether this really serves us as a guideline. He offered as an example the differences in proficiency expected of a student who has completed four semesters of Spanish vs. one who has completed three semesters of Russian. Both have fulfilled the language requirement at St. Olaf, but their level of language proficiency would not be equivalent.

Booth responded that GE guidelines acknowledge that proficiency will vary by language. The term proficiency, he also explained, refers to a matrix of proficiencies set by ACTFL (American Council of Teachers of Foreign Languages). The intended learning outcome tries to rely upon this objective measure of proficiency as set by ACTFL.

Rohn responded that at the University of Minnesota proficiency exams are required to ensure that “seat time” does not substitute for “proficiency.”

Booth clarified that the intended learning outcome has as its purpose to state a goal. It is not intended to also provide a means of measuring or evaluating whether the objective has been met. This will be work for the future.

Gwen Barnes-Karol explained the meaning of the terms fluency and proficiency within the field of foreign language instruction. Proficiency has no one set definition; there are different levels of proficiency, she noted. At St. Olaf, proficiency has three parts: language ability, cultural understanding, and a meta-linguistic component. All three are interwoven in the classroom. It is more complex than it appears.

Wendy Allen offered some institutional history of the language requirements at St. Olaf. Because some modern languages are not as accessible at the high school level as German, French and Spanish, the faculty consciously chose to have two tracks, essentially. The allowance was made in order to encourage students to take languages that are the most difficult for Anglophones: Japanese, Chinese, and Russian. The goal has been to preserve language diversity at the College, she explained.

Jonathan Hill compared language proficiency to writing ability in English. We accept, he noted, that some students will emerge from St. Olaf writing at the A level, others at the C level, and others writing without almost no acumen at all. That said, he noted that we are basing proficiency on the number of courses taken rather than on an objective measure. He proposed that an amendment be made that would acknowledge that proficiency is being measured within the context of St. Olaf, rather than by some external criteria.

Discussion followed on how the amendment might be worded. The language “In the context of language study at St. Olaf…”would be added at the beginning of the motion.

Booth rejected the amendment, suggesting that the faculty vote on the motion as it is or send it back to committee for deliberations.

Hill withdrew the amendment.

Rohn expressed his concern that we are creating our own standards that do not reflect standards of academic and disciplinary world beyond St. Olaf.

Allen argued that the definitions of proficiency set targets for proficiency, which are based on an internationally recognized set of guidelines. The definitions are not something that the language faculty thought up independently.

Ed Langerak noted that the intended learning outcome says that proficiency will be equal to how diligently a student studies.

Mary Titus suggested that we defer to our colleagues in the languages as the experts on this particular set of issues.

Karl Fink affirmed Allen’s comments, and argued that all departments across campus rely on context or background that extends beyond the actual intended learning outcome to establish the meanings of terms like ability or understanding.

Karen Marsalek asked Rohn if reference to the set of international guidelines within the ILO would satisfy his concerns.

Rohn answered that he is concerned about ‘truth in advertising’: the ILO would still be suggesting that language preparation at St. Olaf is doing more than it actually is.

The motion was made that these considerations be taken back to the committee and then a new motion be brought before the faculty.

Discussion of the motion followed.

Margaret O’Leary argued against the motion, explaining that the foreign languages’ faculty have spent a great deal of time and thought on these guidelines. She also reiterated Barnes-Karol’s point that this is only one-third of what students get out of language study.

The question was called and approved. The faculty voted not to send the motion back to committee.

The question was called and approved. The faculty voted to approve Currcomm 0708-06 .

VII. Remarks for the Good of the Order

Mary Carlsen and Sharon Powell announced an initiative to consider student stress management. Please contact one of them if you are interested in participating or if you have ideas about the mental health issues students are facing.

The President adjourned the meeting.

A sound recording of this meeting is available in the College Archive.

Minutes prepared by Anna Kuxhausen, Assistant Professor, Dept. of History.

PRINTABLE VERSION OF MINUTES