graduate council minutes

October 31, 2023

Present:    Marcelo Alvarado-Vargas, Brian Ashburner, Tomer Avidor-Reiss, Sharon Barnes, Larissa Barclay,
                   Saurabh Chattopadhyay, Qian Chen, Mai  Dao, Jennifer DeVries, Jim Ferris, Timothy Fischer, Bashar Gammoh,
                   David Giovannucci, Dan Hammel, Noela Haughton, Michael Morran (for Andrea Kalinoski), Kristen Keith, Addison Kittel (GSA),
                   John Laux, Patrick Lawrence, Bindu Menon, Ling Na, Megan Petra, Sari Youssef,  Connie Schall Rebecca Schneider,
                   Zahoor Shah, Snejana Slantcheva-Durst, Kuo-hui Su, Jami Taylor, Varun Vaiyda, Jerry Van Hoy, Kandace Williams,
                   Addison Kittel (GSA), Jianlong Zhu.

Absent:     Halim Ayan, Eileen Walsh.

Excused:   Patricia Relue.

Guests:     Dilip Das, COGS - Teri Green and Tara Hanna, Scott Molitor.

 

Call to Order, Roll Call, and Approval of Minutes
The meeting was called to order and roll called.  The Minutes of September 19, 2023 were approved.

Executive Reports
Report of the Executive Committee of the Graduate Council
On behalf of Graduate Council, Chair, Dr. Patrick Lawrence reported that the Executive Committee met on October 24, 2023 and discussed:

Agenda for Graduate Council meeting October 31, 2023

  • Nominations for Outstanding Graduate Student Achievement
    The call for nominations for outstanding graduate students has been made. The nomination period extends through November 13th. The recipients will be invited to attend the November 28th or December 12 GC meeting.

  • Graduate Assistants as Title IX responders
    Meeting has been scheduled with the Vicky Kulicke, Director Title IX and Compliance & Title IX Coordinator to discuss whether graduate assistants serve as responders in their role as Graduate Assistants.

  • Provost Search
    The search committee conducted nine virtual preliminary interviews last week. The committee will meet this week to select and recommend four to five semi-finalists to interview on campus for one day in late November and early December. There will not be public forums during the one day interviews. However, by there will be opportunities for graduate faculty and other stakeholders to meet with the finalists when they come to campus for two full days in early spring semester. A new provost should be announced in spring.

  • Next Graduate Council meeting November 14, 2023
    President Gregory Postel is planning to attend. Questions will be solicited from GC about a week prior.

Report of the Vice Provost for Graduate Affairs
Dr. Dan Hammel, Interim Vice Provost for Academic Affairs provided the following updates:

  • Graduate Policies
    Working on issues around some policies and opportunities to streamline processes. Draft policies will be shared with GC Chair, Dr. Lawrence as soon as available to share with the appropriate committee.
            - Leave of Absence

  • Graduate Admissions Data
    There have been changes in the type of data we can collect and share as it relates to the Supreme Court decision. Short term, this is of immediate concern to those holding federal grants. Meetings with Legal Counsel will occur to discuss. Looking longer term will be to address how to address the data that is collected and if, how and under what circumstances it can be made available.

  • Master’s Along The Way
    There has been a lot of interest in master’s along the way. It is an option in some programs. There are differences between a master’s along the way and to what is sometimes referred to as an off-ramp masters for students who are in a Ph.D. program who are not going to continue in the program but who have met the requirements for the master’s in their program. Students  change degree programs and are awarded a master’s degree in lieu of completing the Ph.D. In a master’s along the way students earn the degree while continuing on toward the Ph.D. Programs are not required to offer them, but there needs to be a clear process in place for those that do. More programs are starting to do this so we want to draft a set of procedures that will include input from the college associate deans. We expect to share this information in the spring.

Discussion:
Chair Lawrence noted that the draft will be sent to GC academic regulations committee and then shared with the full Graduate Council for the opportunity to make recommendations. Graduate Council does not have the mandate to create policy, but does have an opportunity to make recommendations. There are several policies for review, some clear and simple that just need some housekeeping and others that have been existence for a long time and deserve a refresher. They have implications for graduate students, so it is important that as an institution we make sure they are effective and working to the best interest of the institution and the students.

Dr. Tomer Avidor-Reiss questioned why there is interest in a master’s ‘along the way’.

Dr. Hammel reiterated the reason that some students do not continue in the Ph.D. program but have met the requirements for a master’s in that specific program. Other students may wish to seek the additional credential of having earned a master’s degree prior to the Ph.D. degree. 

Report of the Vice President for Research
Interim Vice President for Research, Dr. Connie Schall, provided the following updates.

  • Research Compliance Areas l Training l Contacts
    Reviewed the various key institutional review boards for research compliance areas that the Office of Research can help navigate. She noted training content and dates are continuously updated.
    • Institutional Review Board (IRB)
      -  Biomedical IRB
      -  Social Behavioral and Educational IRB
         HRPP Website: https://www.utoledo.edu/research/rsp/irb/
          - Policies and procedures, Regulations
          - Guidance documents, consent form templates, answers to FAQs, training registration
    • Institutional Biosafety Committee (IBC)

      - Human Stem Cell Research Oversight Committee (HSCRO)
      - Institutional Review Entity (IRE)

      IBC Website: https://www.utoledo.edu/research/rsp/RC/biosafety/
          -  Policies and procedures, Regulations
          -  Guidance documents, training registration

      Biomedical IRB Points of Contact:
          -  Madison Rowe-Stanley: Madison.Rowe2@utoledo.edu
          -  Carolyn Eaton: Carolyn.Eaton@utoledo.edu

      Social, Behavioral, and Educational IRB Points of Contact:
          -  Gabby McMunn: McMunn@utoledo.edu
          -  Udita Bhavsar: Udita.Bhavsar@utoledo.edu

    • Controlled Substances and Dangerous Drugs
         IACUC, IBC, Controlled Substances Point of Contact:
          - Tyara Vazquez: Tyara.Vazquez@utoledo.edu
  • InfoEd Updates
    Upcoming Training (scheduled)
    11/07/2023: RSP Webinar: Budget 201. 1:00 - 2:30 PM. Meeting Link.
    11/08/2023: In-Person Session: NSF submissions in InfoEd. 3-4:30 PM in North Engineering, NE 1320. Details to follow.
    11/15/2023: RSP Webinar: Budget 201. 10 - 11:30 AM. Meeting Link.

     Upcoming Training (to be scheduled)
     2-3 NIH-centric workshops over the last week in November and the first 2 weeks in December.
     Will include grants coordinators to help with content in addition to InfoEd support team for system help.
      https://www.utoledo.edu/research/rsp/infoed-explainer.html

Discussion:
A question was raised regarding length of time, sometimes 3-6 months, for graduate students with expedited applications to be processed. This is significantly impacting time for our students, which could add a semester or longer, as well as ensuing complications for paperwork extensions, et cetera.

Dr. Schall responded that she would take this inquiry back to the research compliance group. We have had some instances where the PIs have been disengaged.  PIs must be faculty member as research protocols are under the direction of a faculty member. Faculty member needs to assist students in protocol preparation. Part of reason we have these training sessions is to help faculty and students through the submission, preparation, and review process. About  90% of attendees have been graduate students. Ultimately, engagement and oversight of faculty member is necessary.

Dr. Noela Haughton brought forth the question from her college requesting statistics and percentages to present a comprehensive response to her colleagues.

Dr. Schall replied that data can be pulled and training can be provided to her college or departments.  She welcomes having an informed conversation with her college.

Report of the Graduate Student Association
Ms. Addison Kittel, Vice President of the Graduate Student Association (GSA) reported:

  • Elections for GSA Officer Secretary
    Elections are underway with underway so we anticipate having that position filled soon.

  • College Representatives
    Four seats remain to be filled. Council’s assistance in helping to identify graduate reps is appreciated.

  • Graduate Student Intramural Sports Tournament – November 10, 2023
    12 - 4 pm at the Student Recreation Center.

 Information and Discussion Items
Discussion with Interim Provost and Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs, Dr. Scott Molitor
Chair Lawrence suggested that Dr. Molitor provide introductory comments prior to addressing two questions Graduate Council addressed to him:

Provost Molitor expressed his appreciation for the opportunity to speak to Council.

  • Reorganization of Academic Affairs
    Plans are being finalized for University College and the Honors College. At this time, we have stopped conversations with the Colleges Nursing and Health and Human Services regarding possibly merging of those colleges.
    • College of Arts and Letters
      Dean search is proceeding.
    • College of Nursing
      Dean search will be initiated
    • College of Medicine and Life Sciences
      Chris Cooper has announced his intention to step down at end of the acdemic year.
  •  Strategic Plan

     Metrics are being updated and will be posted on the Strategic Plan tab on the portal as made available. Additionally, colleges will
     be asked to update their strategic plans to align with the University Strategic Plan that went into effect July 2023.

  •  Program Prioritization

     An initiative I am focused on is program prioritization. Data is expected to be rolled out to colleges soon with a request to provide
     examination of low enrolled programs to see if there are things we can do such as combine programs with common core set of
     courses or replace degree granting programs with minors or certificates. We are spread way too thin in terms of faculty workload.
     Faculty should be focused on what has the most pay off in terms of teaching and curriculum delivery and so they can focus on
     other things, like delivering those courses to the best of their ability as well as looking at newer programs and revising existing
     programs. Faculty will need the time to do that. With program prioritization the focus is reducing the number of courses that we are
    offering and that our faculty are responsible for delivering.

  •  Fiscal Year 2025 Budget
     The Board of Trustees has requested Finance provide a five-year forecast to get revenues in line with expenses. They are updating
     currently updating FY 2024 budget and adding another year on that to be followed by meeting with individual Colleges to
     determine what FY 25 requirements. Our goal is to identify opportunities for expense reduction and revenue growth. That will be a
     big topic of conversation with the colleges. We looked at initiatives some of the colleges put forward during our discussions with the
     Huron Consulting group. We are asking to Finance to help with enrollment and revenue forecasts so we have some solid numbers.

Questions from Graduate Council:
Q:  As the budget process for FY25 begins, what are your views as to the importance of funded graduate programs at UT and how                best can that support be addressed in terms of financial priorities and potential further budget reductions required by                              academic colleges?
A:  Interim Provost Molitor replied that funded graduate programs are very important for teaching and research missions. Teaching
     assistants help deliver undergraduate programs as well as other funded students contributing to the research mission. The
     question is will graduate funding see further budget reductions with FY 25. At this point is seems that is unavoidable.
     Unfortunately, graduate funding is not fixed and we have some control over this budget. We hope to minimize the number of cuts.
     I would like to get to a place where we invest in graduate programs  by growing enrollment and generating graduate programs,
     and a number of colleges have worked hard and pursued initiatives, and hopefully, expand additional initiatives to this end. There
     has been a lot of growth is the graduate area, and there has been a lot of focus on non-traditional undergraduate populations
     such as online and transfer student enrollment.  We know there is a demographic cliff and demand cliff with undergraduate,
     direct from high school students. But I do think we have a lot of opportunities for revenue generating graduate programs and
     revenue growth. If we can get to a point where we are generating more revenue in those area, we will have an opportunity to
     reverse some of the cuts to graduate funding.

Q:  Given the FY24 budget cuts, can you speak as to the feasibility of the strategic plan goal of moving UT from R2 to R1, and is that                even still realistic?
A:   Interim Provost Molitor responded that the work toward R1 status has been completed. A final, formal decision will be made when
      ratings come out. It is based on data submitted over last couple of years. A large part is based on success of our faculty, students
      and graduate students research and publications and external funding and reputation of our high quality research and
      reputation and how it is reported. I would be concerned, if we are at R1, about our ability to retain that, given the fact that we are
      unable to replace all the faculty lines and funded graduate students and programs.

Discussion:
Q:   Dr. Tomer Avidor-Reiss inquired as to the definition of a low number in graduate programs and courses.
A:   Provost Molitor replied that it is not yet defined. It may vary by college and be by bottom X percent of low enrolled programs.
      That is my inclination because it will vary by college. Colleges will have the opportunity review and provide their input as they
       undergo this process. How do you approach a low enrolled program – continue, discontinue or combine to augment?
       Is enrollment so low or funding structure such that you are not risking much to shutter the program? Colleges will have the
       opportunity review and provide their input. If there is no way to redirect, you do not want to walk away from revenue. I certainly
       want to be looking at things that can benefit the institution benefit the quality of our programs and without taking a substantial
       hit to any kind of revenue generation.

Q:  Dr. Tomer Avidor-Reiss questioned the consequences to R1 status from cutting TA lines and graduate programs.
A:   Provost Molitor said that while a good question, he does not know the answer and would need to ask of Dr. Anne Fulkerson.

Q:  Dr. Sharon Barnes asked in regard to program prioritization whether other factors, other than program size are being considered,
      such as prestige of faculty, status of alumni, diversity, etc.
A:   Provost Molitor responded that faculty workloads, revenue, and other factors will be considered as colleges consider their
      priorities in terms of their resources and revenue. It has to be a balance. Some programs may have adverse effect with alumni
      or could impact diversity, which is why colleges provide implications and other mitigating factors. That is why considerations
      such as combining programs or offering particular credentials needs to occur because we don’t want potentially adverse effects
      outweighing the positive.

Q:  Dr. Youssef Sari mentioned that he has been approached by King Saud University, with which he has had a long standing
      collaboration, to build a collaborative graduate program that could be expanded to an undergraduate program with UToledo
      and that he would speak to his college dean through process to the provost. Correct process?
A:   Provost Molitor responded that the situation could be reviewed for revenue growth and encouraged Dr. Sari to discuss with his
       college association dean and dean. If you have an international partner that is interested in a collaborative relationship in which
       they would sending students to be enrolled at UToledo, that is a win for us. The Colleges of Business and Innovation and
       Engineering, in particular, have produced a number of those agreements.  

Q:  Would you explain the role that external consultants will play in the college level strategic plans? 
A:   Provost Molitor replied he does not know whether colleges are going to engage external consultants and that they are not being
      forced to do so. If colleges want to pursue that route and feel that it would be beneficial, it is their decision.

Q:  Is it safe to assume that the minimum number of student per class is to reach profitability per class? In other words, if a course
      is profitable with 10 students, is that okay?
A:   Provost Molitor indicated that it is not the only consideration. Course profitability is not that simple, but rather, program profitability
      should be the consideration. For example, summer vs. academic year enrollment. At the undergraduate level, 120 credit hours is the
      required minimum for most programs. And at the graduate level, master’s would be 30 and PhD would be 90. There are
      complications and considerations not only in terms of number of students in the course, but when they are taking a course in their
      curriculum – which semester, what kind of tuition they are paying, where the tuition is coming from, and the aid is the university
      providing. I do not want to look necessarily at a course by course profitability, but rather look for opportunities to reduce the
      number of courses we offer, thereby increasing enrollment in the remaining courses that we offer.  Rather than establishing a
      threshold for course  profitability, let us try to make the courses we offer be more profitable and offer fewer of them so that our
      faculty workload is not spread so thin because we want our faculty to concentrate on doing what they need to do. They should
      concentrate on teacher at a higher quality and focus on development of new or innovative programs that would garner revenue
      and also have time to focus more on their research and service.

Updates from the Vice President for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion — Dr. Dilip Das
In relation to the Supreme Court’s June 29, 2023 decision and its impact on graduate student recruitment and admissions, Dr. Das was pleased to accept the Council’s invitation and thus provided the following overview:

The banning of affirmative action with regard to admissions has been interpreted by our Deputy General Counsel, Janelle Schaller, to include scholarships as well. Detailed questions or concerns about this or SB 83, she is my work colleague in helping to figure out their impacts.

Affirmative action bans have been in place for many years in other states prior to the SC ruling, including in Michigan – schools such as University of Michigan, Eastern Michigan University, Western Michigan University and Central Michigan University. They have experience diversifying student admissions as well as their faculty and staff.

Dr. Das shared and encouraged Council to review the following resource websites:

Dr. Das noted that Western Michigan University employes diverse graduate students as ambassadors to answer inquiries as a way of connecting to prospective graduate students. 

Wayne State University does not shy away from directly talking about diversity and this link provides quite a few resources. The University of Michigan focuses on holistic admission reviews, looking at the entire student, with as many indicators within the admissions realm as possible. They are not just reviewing grades and test scores. They have ended the practice of receiving and reviewing test scores, including Engineering as part of their admissions process.

What does it look like in post academic environment. A good essay focusing on cultivating campus environments where minority students feel they belong. A sense of belonging is critical. My office can help you in thinking about what engaging looks like.

California has been under affirm action ban for three decades. They have solid systems within place of recruiting within an anti-affirmative action.

There are questions and certainly broader impacts on often race related criteria for NIH and NSF grants. Details for each may be different, and I, with guidance from Janelle Schaller, am happy to assist in any way possible.

Dr. Das state that his view is that we should be encouraged to not just stand safely in the green zone, but dip our toes in the yellow zone, without stepping in the red zone, which would be a violation of affirmative action bans. We need examples from other universities to show us the way. The danger is a knee jerk, color blind approach to everything. That is gong backwards. We must continue to cultivate climates of inclusion and assure that we are doing everything within the law to recruit towards diversity that reflects our communities and our country.

Discussion:
Dr. Tomer Avidor-Reiss questioned the encouragement of going from green zone to yellow zone. However, we have heard that if we make a mistake in recruiting on race, faculty themselves, may have to go to court. What is the university commitment to protect faculty if they do that, go from green to yellow.

Dr. Das responded that the Ohio Attorney General has said that we will not support you if there is a lawsuit against you indicating that you have violated affirmative action ban. There is nothing the university can do, which is why you have to work with Janelle and I apologize for suggesting that.

We do not live in a race neutral and for us to take a stance that is race neutral is dangerous. My consideration of the yellow zone is do not take a race neutral stance. 

Dr. Tomer Avidor-Reiss pointed out that this means if a faculty member makes a mistake, then they stand by themselves.

Dr. Das replied that this means that if your efforts specifically and exclusively recruit minority students only for them into your programs, then that is a violation. Your efforts cannot be solely for one group.

Dr. Sharon Barnes stated that her understanding of the Supreme Court decision is focused on admissions. How can we argue to support of race based scholarships. It is vitally important to allow race-based scholarships.

Provost Molitor pointed out that because that public university counsel, including our chief counsel, Charles Jake, is considered to be a deputy attorney general. The State Attorney General has communicated that the Supreme Court decision, although now narrowly focused on admissions, will likely open the door for other lawsuits, involving scholarships and support programs based on race and ethnicity. If a lawsuit comes about, it is not someone vs. The University of Toledo, but someone vs. an individual at UToledo. If that happens, the State is saying that it will not support you, so you would have to provide your own legal counsel, and to that end, if you are found liable in some kind of judgement, you will be responsible for paying this judgement. I do not want our employees to be held personally liable.

Dr. Barnes stated that it amounts to racist intimidation by the State. We have the responsibility to say we do not support this and the institution can say that it supports its faculty not doing that and go along with our peer institutions like Ohio State and fight this as a collective entity that cares about diversity and do the right thing. Look at instances in history where people do not do the right thing because they are afraid over something that hasn’t happened.

Provost Molitor noted that OSU is considering their policies regarding awarding scholarships.

Dr. Barnes replied that the University of Michigan has taken the lead many times on an affirmative action situation. We can be persuasive to OSU and if they have our backs, we are collectively strong.

Provost Molitor noted the concern and indicated that the State Attorney General would not provide legal representation for employees who are subject to lawsuits related to the SCOTUS ruling.

Dr. Das added that scholarships are a huge deal.  There are scholarship funds that include race either directly or adjacently. In some regards it is frozen until the UToledo Foundation finds ways of working with original donors and altering language.  That is a long process.

Dr. Das clarified his statement about standing in the yellow zone, which in his view means, as shared in the Vanderbilt University link, is talking about creating inclusive climates where we actively change our own actions to assure that the work we do with underrepresented minority students, particularly in our classrooms, spaces and labs, is a zone of belonging for them. That attracts other minority students without us directly recruiting them because we are creating places of advancement excellence and belonging.  Those are things we can do.

Dr. Megan Petra stated that is a challenging situation when graduate program accreditation requires that we prove we are actively recruiting and admitting historically oppressed, minoritized and/or underprivileged students. This is even more challenging if too much applicant demographic data, not just the Supreme Court required ban on race and ethnicity) is not available to programs.

Dr. Das responded with a link https://admissions.yale.edu/essay-topics because of the bind we are in if the accrediting agencies say we have to continue to diversity the student body and that we need to demonstrate that with demographic data that you may not have access to any more to do that. Accrediting bodies are looking at how this is going to work. Yale and other universities have changed their application essays. There was a reference to essay by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court that Yale amended to address essays in their application.

Dr. Barnes expressed thanks for all of the hard work folks are doing to create access.

Dr. Das concluded that the impacts of the SCOTUS decisions are an ongoing dynamic situation. He encouraged reaching out to him to partner share ideas.  We will communicate on status of SB 83 so there are clear guidelines. Let’s stay in touch and communicate on this. Do not hesitate to reach out to me and I will work in tandem with Janelle Schaller. We can still diversity of students, faculty and staff and cannot think in a colorblind way.

Standing Committee Reports
Report of the Curriculum Committee
On behalf of the Curriculum Committee, Dr. Timothy Mueser, presented the committee’s report. He pointed out that committee had made a modification to its review procedure by only holding the review for a week, instead of two, thus sending to Graduate Council more quickly. Proposal details can be viewed in the CIM system. Graduate Council approved all proposal unanimously.

The proposals listed below were reviewed by the members of the GCCC with recommendations to
approve.

Propoals for Graduate Council review and approval

The proposals listed below were reviewed and approved by the members of the GCCC.

Proposals approved by the GC Curriculum Committee

Dr. Mueser stated that the committee is in need of a representative from the College of Nursing. 

Note: regarding proposals that indicate removal of GRE requirement for admissions for all applicants, Chair Lawrence clarified that this was removed for all graduate programs, unless the program specifically requested that COGS keep it in place.

List of files for CIM course search: https://nextcatalog.utoledo.edu/courseadmin/
PHYT 6600, FINA 6480, OSCM 5520

List of files for CIM program search: https://nextcatalog.utoledo.edu/programadmin/
NU-PNPR-CER*, HH-PHYT-DPT, M.D./M.B.A. Dual Degree, HH-CED-MA-SCO, HH-PHER-CRG, HH-PUBH-MPH-GENL

Copy and Paste   comma delimited list into CIM courses or CIM programs search box
Click                      Green Search Button, pulls up all listed proposals in alpha order.
Select                    proposal to view, the list of proposals will remain at the top of the browser page

In response to Dr. Avidor-Reiss’ question on why a master’s degree is being offered, Dr. Mueser responded that the issue could involve a separate committee, the Academic Standing Committee (ASC) . If a  student qualifies for a master’s degree, but you tell them no they cannot have it, and they grieve it, the Academic Standing Committee would look at the requirements. If you offer it in your program and they qualify for it, the ASC look at requirements and may need to approve the grievance. An important reason to have options and requirements in place.

Report of the Membership Committee
On behalf of the Membership Committee, Dr. Svetlana Beltyukova, Chair, presented a summary report for Graduate Faculty Membership for Fall I 2023, for applications received between August 28 through October 9, 2023.

Dr. Beltyukova brought to Council’s attention that the committee strongly encourages that the UToledo academic programs should be recommending adjunct membership status for external applicants from academia. For external applicants who are not from academia or there is a special circumstance, perhaps they need to chair committees, special membership status is recommended.  UToledo faculty who are full-time and tenure-track, by definition is Full or Associate membership status is recommended.

One case where applicant where there was a disagreement with what the applicant checked as a requested privilege and the endorsements actually specified the applicant not chair committees. This needs to be verified at the local level.

There are two new members on committee and a representative from Pharmacy is still needed.

GC Membership Committee Report Fall I 2023

Old Business
None.

New Business
None.

Adjournment
There being no further business, the Council adjourned at 1:59 pm.

 

contact us

Main Campus
University Hall
Room: 3240
Mail Stop 933
Phone: 419.530.GRAD (4723)

Office Hours:
Mon-Fri  8:30 am - 5 pm
   
Mailing address:
The University of Toledo
College of Graduate Studies
2801 W Bancroft
MS 933
Toledo, OH 43606

gradstudies@utoledo.edu