Undergraduate Council Academic Programs Subcommittee Meeting

November 4, 2003

Members Present: Ara Arabyan, Bonnie Barber (Co-chair), Sandra Beeler, Patti King, Cindy Rankin (Co-chair), Wayne Decker

Members Absent: Byron Bissell, Paul Burkhardt, Carol Evans, Denise Roe, David Tansik

Guest: Dianne Horgan - Associate Dean, Graduate College

Cindy Rankin called the meeting to order at 3:35 p.m. A quorum was not present. The attending subcommittee members had a discussion about how to handle the lack of a quorum at meetings. Suggestions included:

Asking for members to let Sandy know if they will not be attending.
Sending a proxy to the meeting so that business can be conducted.
Voting by e-mail. However, hearing the discussion is very important to making an informed vote.

Subcommittee members asked that the minutes of October 14th be amended to include pros and cons of the thematic minor as a viable alternative for the Asian American Studies Minor. S. Beeler will make this change and send the amended minutes via the subcommittee listserv for an electronic vote.

Discussion of the 3/2 Program as proposed by the Graduate College

Dianne Horgan, Associate Dean of the Graduate College, was introduced by C. Rankin. D. Horgan gave an overview of the 3/2 program and its implications for both graduate and undergraduate students. Highlights of the program include;

• Promised graduate admission for students admitted to the 3/2 program contingent upon meeting established criteria (e.g., maintenance of a certain GPA).
• Departments must notify the graduate college if this is to be an option for students and submit admission requirements.
• Departments may waive the GRE for admitted students. An intimate knowledge of student academic ability should be a good predictor of performance.
• Creation of a special category that would allow undergraduates to count as graduates in their fourth year since more graduate courses would be taken.
• Currently 6 credits of undergraduate course work at the 400-level may count toward a graduate degree. It is proposed to allow these 6 units to be double-counted toward undergraduate and graduate degrees and also allow an additional double-counting of graduate credit hours, up to 12 units. Thus, 18 units could be double-counted for both undergraduate and graduate degrees—12 units of graduate work and 6 units of undergraduate work. With a 33-unit master’s program, a student could earn both degrees with a minimum of 135 units.
• By encouraging summer support students can have research experience and opportunity to earn summer credits.
• There is no reduction in quality. The master’s is based on all but 6 units of graduate credit. The bachelor’s would benefit from 6 units taken at the graduate level.
• Could lighten the credit loads of departments and be innovative without having to start from scratch or invest additional resources. An approved model would provide departments with guidelines for establishing a similar program.
• Possible benefits:

• Would save money for students
• Keep Arizona students in Arizona instead of attending graduate colleges in other states
• Provide a good option for honors students who often take grad courses their senior year anyway
• No reduction in quality of the degrees 
• Cannot be used for international students because of the problem of a 3 year undergraduate degree in some foreign countries
• Good for community support 
• Increase graduate enrollment without increasing needed resources

Subcommittee members asked about:

• What departments have expressed and interest and how did they find out about the program? (B. Barber).

• D. Horgan responded that the graduate college has been talking to the departments about graduate college issues in general. Several departments are excited about the possibility of a 3/2 program. Each year departments have a handful of top students they would like to keep. This would provide an opportunity to keep top students.

• Senior students have been allowed to take graduate courses in the past. What is special about the 3/2? (A. Arabyan)

• D. Hogan responded that it had been allowed for seniors with high GPAs for either graduate or undergraduate credit, but not both. The difference with the 3/2 is double-counting as with the Advanced Placement courses, which count for both high school and college credit. Currently, graduate credit taken by undergraduates only counts toward a graduate degree if not used to meet undergraduate degree requirements.

• What if a senior student takes two required graduate math courses and then becomes a graduate student? (A.Arabyan)

• D. Horgan responded that students could be given placement credit for the math, but if the graduate degree is 30 units, the student must still fulfill that requirement of 30 units. Eighteen units could be counted at both the graduate and undergraduate level; could be more, but may be less. Twelve units corresponds with what is currently happening. For courses taken beyond graduation requirements, 6 units can be applied to a graduate degree.

• The implication seems to be that the undergraduate student education would include 12 units of graduate credit instead of undergraduate credit. It strengths what they have taken and allows the credit to be used later for a graduate degree. (B. Barber).

• D. Horgan responded that at the graduate level, students would be “short”, however, at the undergraduate level the programs would have normal requirements but would be academically stronger.

• Why would any student think of completing two degrees independently if they can do this? Why go the full 4 years and then another two when you can do it in 5 years? (C. Rankin)

• D. Horgan responded that the 3/2 does not work very will if there is a thesis option involved. Many of the required hours are thesis hours. The 3/2 programs will tend to be programs that lack a thesis option and where students will not go on to complete a doctoral degree. Not all departments would offer this type of program. For example, Counseling would be a 4/2 program.

• Do you have a sense of what departments could benefit from this type of program? (W. Decker)

• D. Horgan responded that there is interest in engineering and departments with double majors, like chemistry and physics. Programs between departments would be a possibility.

• Would it be up to the departments to sent the criteria for which students can and cannot participate in the 3/2 program? (W. Decker)

• D. Horgan responded that there should be an overall set of standards, preferably including not less than a 3.0 GPA because this is what it takes to get into grad school; a 3.5 GPA would be better. This should not be a “normal” program where lots of students would be admitted. This could be a tool to recruit top students who are already here and to increase enrollment without increasing resources. Would the graduate college have major oversight of setting standards then fine-tuning in cooperation with the departments who are interested in the 3/2 program? (C. Rankin)
• D. Horgan responded that yes, it would be important. Degrees would be the same except for the acceleration due to the double-counting of units. The Graduate College needs to monitor the program to be sure students meet the high admission standard and be able to evaluate its effectiveness.

• Philosophically, four years and x number of units has been established as criteria for awarding a degree because faculty feel this is what it takes to become educated in a particular area. Now we are being asked to say no, we do not actually have to do this. This would eliminate a year of study and some how you end up with a year less of "stuff." (C. Rankin)

• D. Horgan emphasized that students need to meet the requirements of both degrees. They do not have to take some content twice. Students would master the same amount of information.

• Would a student have to declare their intention and, if so, when? If a student comes into the program and begins taking courses and then leaves for a job, can that student still come back two years later and complete the grad program? (A. Arabyan)

• D. Horgan the student would have to apply and be accepted into the 3/2 program. If the student leaves for a couple of years and comes back, the student would have to reapply to the University and also reapply for the 3/2 program. A student might be rejected for the 3/2 program but may still pursue the regular program. All the rules remain the same even if you drop out of a 3/2 program

• Do you apply at the beginning of your educational career or as a junior? (B. Barber)

• D. Horgan responded that it would typically be when the student is a junior. The department could require a GRE, but the 3/2 program would not require a GRE because by that time the educational level of the student will be known.

• Does this really help the graduate college? (W. Decker)

• D. Horgan answered that this would pretty much assure top students applying. They will tend to be Arizona students and if they did not go away for their undergraduate program, perhaps they would prefer to stay in the area.

• What the Graduate College is asking for is to allow colleges to come forward and say that they would really like to try this and it would be up to them to propose the program. What would be the oversight process for the Graduate College? (B. Barber)

• D. Horgan replied that the Graduate College would have to establish admission criteria and establish the overlap allowed. A student could then be identified as a 3/2 participant so they can be followed through the program. It can be done without investing large amounts of time. Admissions processes could include an essay or portfolio and not be tied strictly to the GPA.

C. Rankin thanked D. Horgan for attending the meeting and explaining the 3/2 program proposal.

The subcommittee discussed the previous presentation and raised the following issues:

• Raises maturity issues – would students benefit from the additional year of study. (W.Decker)
• Practical reasons for getting through early like finance and employment. (B. Barber)
• The graduate program would be diminished under this proposal, but the undergraduate program would not be diminished. There will be one less year of study at the grad level. (A. Arabyan)
• Discouraging thesis work and inequity for students in a regular program vs the 3/2 program. (A. Arabyan)
• The Graduate College is actually diminished in units. (C. Rankin)
• The undergraduate student in the program graduates with stronger, more indepth course work. (B. Barber)
• Students cannot get courses now so they are already hanging on past four years. The burden may pass to the graduate courses and that could raise the standards. (W. Decker)
• Instructors already struggle with students from foreign countries who are unprepared in either or both writing or language skills. To see this as a beneficial path for those students might not be so. (A. Arabyan)
• Graduate students do get a better experience because class size is small. Will the quality of the graduate classroom experience decline when class size is increased in popular programs? (P. King)
• Is this lowering quality to increase productivity? (A. Arabyan)
• Could help address state needs for employee shortage areas like nursing and teaching. It might help keep talent here in the state where we can use it. (C. Rankin)

B. Barber made a motion to move forward to the Undergraduate Council a recommendation to develop the 3/2 program through the Graduate College; seconded by Wayne Decker. (Electronic vote to follow.)

P. King stated that on November 19^th there will be another meeting about the 3/2 program in which representatives from Financial Aide, Bursar and Curriculum & Registration will participate to discuss the impact to students’ financial aide, etc. P. King asked if subcommittee members wanted to hear the outcome of that meeting prior to sending the proposal forward to full Council.

C. Rankin responded that the report on the meeting could take place at the full Council meeting.

Transfer of the Gerontology GIDP program to the Cďllege of Nursing

The Gerontology program is transferring to the College of Nursing. The undergraduate minor is to be disestablished immediately and will not transfer with the master’s program, PhD minor, or the graduate certificate. Undergraduate courses will be ended as students currently enrolled in the undergraduate minor complete the program.

The Gerontology Certificate is an official ABOR approved certificate. The Arizona Center on Aging will be responsible for admission and the College of Nursing will be responsible for monitoring the students and the courses. The Arizona Geriatric Education Center will deliver the courses. Motion made by W. Decker to delete the undergraduate minor in gerontology with the stipulation that an adequate number of undergraduate courses are to be maintained until such time as currently enrolled students have completed the minor program; seconded by A. Arabyan

The meeting was adjourned at 4:55 P.M.

Respectfully submitted by Sandra Beeler