Academic Planning Council
Minutes
A regular meeting of the Academic Planning Council was held on May 5, 2006, Strosacker Room, Park Libarary. The
Provost was present. A quorum being present, the meeting was called to order at 1:05 p.m.
Present: Adams, Baugh, Dailey, Howell, Jones, Lary, Krider (for Martin), Moore, Newby, Orf, Rawls, Riordan,
Scukanec (for Hageman), Storch, Vetter (for Fields) // Absent: Christie, Kohrman, Roscoe, Shapiro // Guest: Joyce
Henricks, Ted Bolema, Rich Hill
New Business
I. Minutes: Adams moved to approve the April 7, 2006 minutes; Rawls seconded. Carried.
II. New Program and New Initiative Proposals:
A. Business Law and Economics Major – Proposal presented by Ted Bolema and Rich Hill. Strong
support received from both departments and college. First program of its kind in Michigan.
Issues raised by APC members:
1. Do you anticipate over time that the number of students will grow? Answer: Yes, the number given
is modest.
2. Clarify no new faculty and no new courses? Answer: Yes, but could change as program grows.
3. Why not a concentration instead of a major? Answer: This gives students a background in both
economics and law and it sells better.
4. Writing not captured in learning outcomes. Modify to reflect writing. Outcomes are good, but there
are some shortcomings.
5. Explain difference between B.A., B.S. and B.S. in B.A.
6. What about ethics?
7. When launching a new program, cannot be done for free.
8. Is ECO 350 classified as capstone? Answer: No.
9. Where do students synthesize? Most courses; course already exist with that kind of focus.
10. Are there any hidden prerequisites? Answer: No.
11. Clarify responsibilities of both departments.
Voting Results: 12 total votes out of a possible 16 votes
12 Approve to proceed through the curricular process
0 Revise and resubmit a full proposal which responds to concerns of APC and provost
0 Do not approve to proceed through curricular process
B. Ethics, Values and Society Minor – Proposal presented by Joyce Henricks.
Issues raised by APC members:
1. With the makeup of courses students could complete with mostly 100 and 200 level courses. Should
specify that certain number of 300 level courses are required.
2. Why so many choices?
3. How would you assess?
4. Work on outcomes language; needs to be more assessable.
5. What kind of interaction will faculty have to assess?
6. Important to have a course on race, diversity or multiculturalism.
7. Include more up-to-date information in the rationale section (Part II).
8. Justify faculty; explain well if money involved.
9. Who will advise and do assessment?
Voting Results: 12 total votes out of a possible 16 votes
11 Endorse program concept and encourage development of full proposal
1 Postpone decision on program concept and encourage revision of concept proposal
0 Reject program concept and discourage development of full proposal
The next meeting is scheduled for Friday, September 22, 2006 from 1-3 p.m. in the Strosacker Room, Park Library.
Deadline for submission of items for this meeting is no later than 12:00 p.m., Friday, September 15, 2006.
The meeting was adjourned at 2:15 p.m.