J. Philippe Abraham, Jeanette Altarriba, Scott Barclay, Seth Chaiken, Richard Collier, Sue Faerman, Chris Faugere, Ingrid Fisher, Robert Gibson, Anne Hildreth, Carolyn Malloch
Guests: Robert Andrea, Dean Leonard, Sue Maloney, Sue Phillips (Guest)
Minutes from the
Bob Gibson reported that
CAAS reviewed the Standards for
Vice Provost Faerman mentioned
questioned whether the proposal specifies the policy. How will potential
students know whether or not they might be eligible? Information will be
provided via student applications, brochures will reflect suggestions, and
presentations will also be given to students. Students reaching the criteria
will be invited to join the
Page 2 of 4
SAT score of 1220 is required. After wording is clarified and approved, the language will be included in literature, the Undergraduate Bulletin, and the web site.
This amendment was approved and will be forwarded to the UPC, which is also considering the proposal.
Bob Gibson mentioned that final wording has been completed and distributed copies of the student form to the UAC members present at the meeting. The italicized portion is the policy from the Undergraduate Bulletin. The points included in the draft were discussed previously. The word “graduation” in the first bullet will be removed. Reference to grad/med schools was made a little more generic. In the third bullet “your Undergraduate Bulletin” has been changed to “the Undergraduate Bulletin”. The sentence regarding grades of “U” being viewed as equivalent to an “E” could be confusing to students. After discussions, the Council agreed to change the last sentence in the last bullet to “A grade of ‘U’ earns no credit, however grades of C-, D+, D, D-, do earn credit.”
In response to the suggestion the formula might confuse some applicants, it was noted that "Group 1" status means nothing to anyone outside of SUNY System or those on campuses who deal with admissions issues. If students who are "Group 1" have no way of knowing this, how will they determine their eligibility? Dean Leonard informed the Council that Dick Collier mentioned to him there is a way to perform the calculations. A Council member suggested there be a point where students are confirmed of their admittance and also that high standards remain for acceptance. Students should be told that this is a guideline, their GPA will count, and that their application will be reviewed along with other applicants.
Bob Andrea, Director of Admissions and Enrollment, mentioned that last year 517
Sheila Mahan mentioned that the goal is to increase the "Group 1" applicant pool. Students should be informed when they are included in that pool for acceptance into the program. A Council member mentioned that in the previous discussion of the Honors College the UAC
Page 3 of 4
agreed to give the Governing Board time to work out the specific criteria. It was also noted that in the future there might be a need to make the standards more selective.
Dean Leonard mentioned he is sensitive to the wording of a public statement, but the internal policy could be confidential in nature for those defining the policy. His concern is with too many students coming into the program. Also with their limited resources, they are running as fast as possible to accommodating all enrolled students. Dean Leonard also expressed concern with the number of junior transfer students. 589 accounting/business students came into the freshmen class. He mentioned the school could handle 180 transfer students.
Could the sentence
referencing “a minimum HSGPA of 85% and a minimum SAT of 1100” be tweaked,
since a student with those two numbers would not be "Group 1"?
On the other hand, if higher minima were to be published as a threshold, such
as HSA 90 plus SAT 1200, this would exclude some of the "Group 1"
students we are attempting to attract. It was asked whether, given the caliber
of students we aspire to attract and the sort of skills needed in the
A member suggested there
seems to be a contradiction and a possible "image" problem of trying
to attract really good students on the one hand yet not expecting them to do
something extra to apply, not indicating that our
standards and expectations for the program are rigorous, etc. Collier added
that advertising suggesting
Core courses have to be finished with a 2.0. This does make the proposed program different. Non-"Group 1" students may complain. As an example, one roommate with a 2.0 GPA admitted as a freshman remains in the program while his roommate with a 2.6 was denied entry. It was acknowledged that under the proposed policy, that would be allowed. Dean Leonard pointed out that "life isn't always fair" but the advantage given the "Group 1" student was a reward for the excellent work and ability demonstrated in high school.
What of a student in good academic standing that does not perform well? The student under 2.0 would be removed even if they have taken/not taken the required core courses. Required courses must be completed before entering junior year. A member mentioned this needs clarification. A similar problem existed when the Council previously reviewed the social welfare program. If a student is removed from the major, they will be unable to take core courses.
These questions need to be detailed as part of the admissions policy. There should be a guarantee that "Group 1" students will be admitted and that the policy is confirmed for a 2006 implementation. Could the Council vote today and agree to review the proposal’s wording at a future date?
Sheila Mahan mentioned our
goal is to have an improvement of students’ academic preparation for admission
Page 4 of 4
hasn't yet completed the seven core courses won't have access to the majors-only junior and senior courses; He suggested that other "Group 1" students may choose to go part-time, and they wouldn't fit a rigid schedule either.
A member was uncomfortable
with the 2.0 GPA requirement since it raises the issue of equity for students applying to the
The Council agreed to adopt
the following language. “UAC approved direct admission to the
must consider clarifications before the proposal’s implementation, and that
must completed by the end of the UAC year. The
next Undergraduate Academic Council meeting will be held Monday,
Notes taken by Joanne Baronner, Undergraduate Studies.