| Senators | Stephen Ulrich (PUA, CJ, SW) |
| Abdullah Alhurani (Nursing) A | Changzheng Wang (at large) |
| Ibukun Amusan (Math & Sci) | |
| Ken Andries (AFE) | Ex Officio Members and Guests |
| Nancy Capriles (BSS) | Aaron Thompson (President) |
| Alice Collins (Nursing) A | Candice Jackson (VP Academic Affairs) |
| Rene Desborde (Business) | Deneia Thomas (Assc. VP Institutional Effectiveness) |
| Gary Elliott (WYS) E | Erin Wheeler (Asst. VP Academic Support) |
| Maheteme Gebremedhin (AFE) | Bruce Griffiths (Math & Sci) |
| Caroline Gibson (FIAR) E | Mara Merlino (BSS) |
| Cindy Glass (BSS) | Tierra Freeman (BSS) |
| William Graham (EDU) A | Chandee Felder (Senate Admin) |
| Robert Griffin (FIAR) | Kris Grimes (AFE) |
| Buddhi Gywali (AFE) A | Elgie McFayden (Faculty Regent) |
| Dantrea Hampton (Library) | James Obielodan (Grad Director) |
| Jens Hannemann (Comp Sci) | Donavan Ramon (WYS) |
| Robert Hebble (Math & Sci) A | Cynthia Shelton (WYS) |
| Ashok Kumar (at large) | Fariba Bigdeli-Jahed (Math & Sci) |
| Vikas Kumar (AQU) E | David Shabazz (LLP) |
| Li Lu (Math & Sci) | Mara Merlino (BSS) |
| Joe Moffett (LLP) | James Obielodan (Grad Director) |
| Narayanan Rajendran (at large) | Karen Heavin (Math & Sci) |
| Reba Rye (at large) | John Sedlacek (AFE) |
| Kimberly Sipes (at large) | |
| Peter Smith (LLP) | |
Stephen Ulrich (PUA, CJ, SW)
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 3:14pm. Fourteen senators were present.
### 1. Approval of agenda
The agenda was approved unanimously.
### 2. Approval of minutes
The minutes of the 9/26/2016 Faculty Senate meeting were approved as distributed.
### 3. Faculty Senate President Report
President Sipes shared with Senate information about the meeting held on 10/6/2016 between the Executive Committee and Academic Search, the firm hired to help with the presidential search. In order to put together appropriate search materials, Academic Search wanted to know perceptions on the strengths, challenges, and points of pride about KSU. Dr. Max Stewart (Provost at KSU from 2011-12) is leading the team for Academic Search.
===== PAGE 3 =====
In terms of strengths, the Executive Committee cited the university’s land grant status; its new use of etexts; its liberal arts focus; its HBCU heritage; and small class sizes. Challenges included too many interim positions; lack of institutional memory due to turnover; ambiguity about the budget; not enough spent on instruction. BASC and PCC gave Academic Search typed lists of qualities they wanted to see in a president. President Sipes suggested APC send along a list as well. Chair Moffett said he would.
Academic Search will be involved throughout the entire process and will use a variety of means to inform the larger academic community about the position.
President Sipes projected a list of members of the university’s presidential search committee. Chair Rye noted that there was not enough faculty representation. She cited AAUP’s position that such a committee should include more than one faculty representative. Several recent presidential searches at other public institutions across the state have had at least two, sometimes three, faculty members on the committees. Chair Rye pointed out that since faculty carry out the teaching mission of the university it makes sense for there to be more faculty committee members; this is not to mention it will help further strengthen the bonds between the faculty and administration after the recent period of much division.
A guest asked if Hettie Oldham would remain as staff representative on the search committee. Faculty Regent Elgie McFayden indicated that she had been replaced with the new Staff Regent, Derrick Gilmore.
A senator noted that there was no STEM representation on the committee. Regent McFayden replied that some members do indeed have STEM backgrounds. He added that KSU alums are also well represented, as are members of the community. He noted that while he would like to see more faculty added to the committee, then there would need to be more staff added. Chair Rye asked why staff would need to be added. While staff serve an indispensable role at the university, faculty are central to its teaching mission. She noted she would like to see the Faculty Regent be a strong advocate for faculty on the committee. Regent McFayden replied that he was insulted by the implication that he was not, and he asked for that sentiment to be recorded in the Minutes. Chair Rye noted that she did not intend her comment as an insult.
President Sipes announced that time was up. No motion was made to extend time.
#### 4. Dr. Candice Jackson – VPAA
VP Jackson noted that the search committee consisted of representatives from across the university and thus different groups are well represented. She noted we all have the option to voice concerns to the search firm itself.
She went on to say that she did not want to speak at length so that she could give time over to the upcoming discussion of centralized advising.
A senator asked if this presidential search committee will be same committee to search for president, not just to select the search firm. Dr. Jackson responded that it is. The firm will
===== PAGE 4 =====
identify presidential candidates to present to the faculty. Regent McFayden confirmed that the firm will vet candidates and select 5-8 who the committee will consider.
A guest asked who makes the decision on the president. Regent McFayden replied that the committee will. The guest noted that therefore more faculty should be on the committee.
Chair Andries noted that there are more people on the committee from the community than those who will serve under the president. Chair Glass expressed the concern that the committee may have an outdated view of the current struggles at the university and who we are now. She cited Chair Rye’s research that showed 2-3 faculty members on presidential search committees at the other public universities in the state. VP Jackson asked about the size of the faculties at these institutions, and how proportional the committees are. Chair Andries noted the community member representation was not proportional on the current committee. He that adding more faculty would help with the problems of trust between faculty and the administration as well as low morale at the university. VP Jackson replied that she notes these concerns but did not have input on the make-up of the committee. Regent McFayden stressed that stakeholders across campus will be able to have input on the presidential candidates.
President Sipes reiterated that all points of view could be expressed to Academic Search through Christina Leath.
#### 5. Dr. Erin Wheeler – Advising Policy
Dr. Wheeler shared a PowerPoint that addressed concerns about the university’s movement to a centralized advising model, particularly the concerns expressed in a memo from PCC. Regarding the concern that there was not enough faculty input on the model’s design, she noted that chairs were asked for input in meetings starting last May. This model may seem like a drastic change, but the existing process was weak. This is not so much a new policy as a clarification of the advising structure.
The new system allows faculty to serve in career mentoring. She has spoken with faculty and chairs and has heard that faculty want to spend less time with audits and the like and more on building relationships and getting students into their career field of choice.
Due to budget constraints, the university will not be able to hire career coaches. There is one professional advisor left from the old system; everyone else is new. Two of these new staff members have worked on improving the graduation rate for the 2010 cohort.
A guest asked if it will be the job of success coaches to manage specific cohorts. Dr. Wheeler replied that two coaches have worked that way for about nine months. They provide consistency and help identify overall factors that help or harm graduation rates.
A guest asked if the success coach works with everyone in a specific cohort. Dr. Wheeler noted that they do and their work needs to be data driven. Students have many reasons why they drop out; success coaches work to remove those barriers. A number of students have re-enrolled due to the efforts of these coaches. Dr. Jackson noted that these success coaches allow the university to work with students in a different way than faculty can. Since there is a natural
===== PAGE 5 =====
attrition rate, we have to work very hard to graduate students. Dr. Wheeler noted that her goal is to have a tight network so we don’t lose a student; now we will have documentation about how we have tried to help a student.
Dr. Wheeler also noted she appreciated the work of faculty and hopes to see faculty boasting about student achievements. She pointed out that advising on things like graduate applications take plenty of time already; the advising center will try to help students with other tasks.
The role of the faculty mentor was discussed. He or she will promote student organizations; help students applying for internships or graduate schools; and assist with data collection on career preparation.
This 3:1 model—that is, each student working with an Academic Advisor, Success Coach, and Faculty Mentor—is tied together with the Faculty Liaison for each area. Chairs have been asked to select a person for this task who knows the curriculum of the program. The Faculty Liaison will meet with the Academic Advisor; attend advising meetings; meet with faculty mentors; review course schedules and academic plans with the academic advisor; and collect and report assessment data on graduate school and career preparation activities.
Dr. Wheeler addressed questions about the section of the proposal she had sent out that suggested faculty would be assessed on advising. She stressed that this new system was not meant to impact tenure and promotion processes negatively. Dr. Wheeler suggested that for those faculty deeply involved in advising, building an advising portfolio can be a way to showcase one's work. She noted this proposal was sent to the Tenure and Promotion Committee by President Burse last spring. We would need to flesh out further the ways in which advising could be evaluated under the category of Service.
Dr. Wheeler noted we are trying to improve the culture of advising and “customer service.” Faculty are welcome to attend registration meetings between the Academic Advisor and students. Her office hopes to streamline the communication of advising and increase the importance of registration. More students need to be pre-registered.
A motion to extend time for 10 minutes was passed unanimously.
A guest expressed concern about Academic Advisors being able to acquire enough knowledge about the particulars of a major, especially since some majors have many students and several options. Additionally, curriculum ladders can be faulty since certain courses may not be offered when planned for various reasons. Dr. Wheeler replied that some of these concerns were already being addressed. The Advising Center will start with seniors. She reiterated that faculty are welcome to come over and that the Center is glad to work with faculty in doing advising at certain times. Nursing, for example, is doing all advising at one time. Dr. Wheeler stressed that faculty would not be handing over all control; the Faculty Liaison will be working with the Academic Advisor to communicate any essential information / knowledge. President Sipes expressed concern about this process being achievable in the next two weeks.
===== PAGE 6 =====
Dr. Wheeler asked how many faculty have already had students pick their schedules. Two faculty members raised hands. A guest noted that faculty have specific advisees they work with. Dr. Wheeler said her office is working on cleaning up majors in Banner and part of the reason why a central advising center is helpful is so we can get reliable information on all students.
Another guest expressed appreciation for the concept of more support for students but echoed the concern about advisors in the Center knowing all they need to. She suggested that faculty should input student schedules and then the academic advisor can meet with students. She noted that sometimes classes are added to the ensuing semester schedule only after it is clear what students need.
A motion to extend time for 10 minutes was passed.
Regent McFayden asked if Dr. Wheeler's office is moving to Hathaway. She noted that it is not. Even though ASB is not student-friendly, it is centrally located.
A guest echoed the concern that the proposal sent by email by Dr. Wheeler suggested faculty would be evaluated on advising by staff. Dr. Wheeler stressed that was not the case. Chair Glass added that the requirements for an advising portfolio are onerous. Dr. Wheeler noted that staff will follow these guidelines, but what faculty do is up for review. The guest expressed appreciation for Dr. Wheeler's efforts but noted that anything having to do with faculty evaluation needs to come through Faculty Senate. Dr. Jackson confirmed that faculty will work together to define how advising fits into the tenure and promotion process. The guest noted that we need to establish metrics for review, and Dr. Wheeler replied that her office did get initial feedback from the Tenure and Promotion Committee. A senator pointed out that the approach taken with this initiative is evocative of the previous administration's unilateral way of operating. He suggested passing the issue to PCC for the committee to work on.
President Sipes added that advising has always been part of teaching, not service.
President Thompson agreed that anything having to do with evaluation should come through Faculty Senate and the Vice President’s office. We are going through a growing processes and we need to learn how to do things together; and we must avoid being haphazard. We need a better advising system in place. The 2014 cohort is where we have best bet of having a decent graduation rate. Performance funding is coming in two years and we must be prepared to deal with it. We need to have a management plan in to the state next month.
President Sipes confirmed with President Thompson that he was inferring that this change in advising could be postponed until the spring. President Thompson replied he did not want to override what others had done, but suggested the various parties should sit down and establish a workable procedure and timeframe.
Chair Andries pointed out that part of the problem is that this initiative was not mentioned until 10/3 saying it would take effect 10/1. Dr. Wheeler apologized and noted that she believed chairs had communicated the changes.
===== PAGE 7 =====
Dr. Jackson suggested an ad hoc committee should be assembled to decide the way forward.
### 6. Report of the Academic Policies Committee – Joe Moffett
Chair Moffett discussed APC 15-16-05, a proposal for online courses. He noted that after discussion in the committee, APC added some minor points, including noting the Director of Online Programs should be provided with appropriate support and staff; faculty should indicate on syllabi when attendance requirements exceed those stated in the policy; and faculty should be allowed to choose if online course evaluations are used in annual review. A guest pointed out that PCC had passed an item in recent years that required all courses to be part of the annual review. President Thompson noted that online courses are becoming even more closely scrutinized than traditional courses. The committee therefore should strive to meet or exceed standards in course review. Chair Moffett agreed to take the item back to the committee. Senate voted unanimously to table the issue.
In the interest of time, the meeting moved on to the next committee report.
President Sipes asked Chair Rye if the report of BASC could be moved to after CC since Senate needed to be sure to address CC’s action items and the meeting was running long. Chair Rye readily agreed.
7. Report of the Curriculum Committee – Ken Andries Chair Andries covered the action items presented to Senate:
16-17-01 NUR 118 Independent Study
Chair Andries noted that this course is proposed since many new students recruited from ITT need to have their skills brought up to speed. Nursing faculty will work with students individually.
16-17-02 NUR 699 Applied Statistics in Nursing
This course is needed for the Doctor of Nursing Practice program.
16-17-03 NUR 708 Psychopharmacology
Chair Rye asked if we have faculty to cover the courses. Chair Andries affirmed we do. Chair Rye then asked if the independent studies will serve as an overload. Chair Andries replied that they would be. A guest asked if faculty will be compensated for the overload, to which President Thompson replied that faculty have volunteered to do these independent studies. Chair Andries noted that this extra work may need to last only a couple semesters by which point the new transfer students should be up to speed. President Thompson added that at his previous institution, once some had taught a number of courses like independent studies, they would be granted a course release. He indicated we could consider if that would be workable here. Chair Rye noted there is already a provision that specifies that a number of overloads add up to a course release.
The items all passed by unanimous vote.
===== PAGE 8 =====
Chair Andries then introduced other items:
16-17-04 Certificate of Food Safety, AFE: Nutritional Science and Food Systems Option
16-17-05 Certificate of Human Health and Nutrition, CAFSSS
Chair Andries shared that the intent is that these certificates would serve as intermediate recognition for students working toward AFE degrees. They also serve as credentials for individuals seeking such, and also for those in industry who might need professional development. A senator asked if these certificates are driven by demand. Chair Andries affirmed that there is indeed demand for them among professionals and employers. Another senator inquired about the pre-requisites for the 400 level courses. A guest noted that there were very few pre-requisites generally.
The proposals passed unanimously.
A quorum was lost at 4:58pm, after which time conversation proceeded informally.
Respectfully submitted,
Joe Moffett, Faculty Senate Secretary
===== PAGE 9 =====
# Academic Policies Committee Meeting (October 3, 2016)
Members Present: Joe Moffett (Chair), Ashok Kumar (Vice Chair), Ibukun Amusan (Secretary), Nancy Capriles, Maheteme Gebremedhin, Nkechi Amadife
Meeting called to order at 3:16
The Agenda was approved.
The chair mentioned that Caroline Gibson is a new member of APC.
Work on the revised online program proposal was completed and approved.
A question was asked about how the online course readiness assessment tool would be implemented. Chair Moffett said he spoke with Jennifer Miles who said a proposal to purchase license for SmarterMeasure has been sent to administration. The assessment would probably be done through Ms. Miles' office. It would measure the readiness of students to take online courses. She was fine with it being something like a tutorial and not necessarily a punitive measure.
Faculty are encouraged to include any attendance requirements on their syllabus. The director should have an office that handles all technology issues about online teaching and learning. Faculty may request to include evaluations of their online courses as part of their annual reviews.
The draft KSU Handbook on Academic Policies and Procedures was discussed.
A senator who reviewed the policies about research involving human or animal subjects said that it is a comprehensive document. It has clear wording about compensation, conflicts of interest, and other rules relating to students and researchers. It is generally a good document for covering liability.
The Registry team that put the document together met once with APC in Spring 2016 but most of the work was independent of APC. It was mentioned that recently approved proposals may be missing from the document and it was suggested that all approved academic related proposals should go in this handbook, including calendar and attendance policies.
Regarding attendance policy, the current one was handed down from a previous administration and was not approved by APC. There is no knowledge that the APC proposal two years ago that had suggestions about attendance policy was approved.
The handbook should be shared with faculty senate and chairs for more suggestions. APC's goal is to complete the first draft and send to faculty by January for review, and have the final draft completed by April.
It was suggested that the handbook should be kept under the VPAA's office on the internet. Also, the general counsel should approve the document, for legal purposes.
APC was asked to provide two members for a subcommittee that will work together with VPAA, senate president, and two members of PCC on the faculty handbook. Joe Moffett and Ibukun Amusan volunteered to serve on the subcommittee.
===== PAGE 10 =====
The faculty senate executive committee will meet with the president search committee soon to provide suggestions on qualities/qualifications that the next KSU president should have. APC members suggested that the person should be outside-looking. He/she should have connections and be involved in the community, doing fundraising, scholarship galas, and help bring money to the university. The person should not be a micro-manager. He/She may delegate the day to day running of the school to a strong Provost. The new president should be international-looking as well, helping to establish collaboration with foreign universities and governments, and encourage the recruitment of foreign students, who will pay international fees to KSU. He/she should build on the good things already taking place so that the university can have some form of continuity. He/she should have some academic experience. The search committee should research candidates on the internet before finalizing their choice.
The centralized advising plan from Dr. Wheeler was discussed briefly. Some of the issues raised include the following: faculty were not consulted about the plan, some faculty may have many advisees while some may not have any, evaluating faculty on advising and having them submit advising portfolio for tenure/promotion may not be fair to everyone. It was suggested that advising should be considered as part of service since teaching is the primary responsibility of faculty.
The meeting adjourned 4:35pm.
===== PAGE 11 =====
# ACADEMIC POLICY COMMITTEE NEW PROPOSAL
ACADEMIC UNIT: All Academic Units___
DATE PREPARED: 2/24/16 (original); 10/23/16 update (current version)___
PRIMARY AUTHOR(S): APC___
___
### 1. DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE:
The proposed policy statements attempt to create consistency for the delivery of online course content at the University.
2. STARTING WITH: (Excluding exceptional circumstances proposals will take effect Fall of the following year).
_Fall, ___X_ Spring, ___ Summer, 2017 Year
3. CURRENT POLICY: (Please See Current Catalogue, Faculty Handbook...)
There is no set of policy statements that covers the issues below, including defining different types of courses, noting who should review online courses and by what process those courses are developed, as well as distinguishing those students who should not take online courses.
### 4. PROPOSED CHANGES:
### I. Definitions of Course Modalities:
Traditional courses: Courses that meet in a regular fashion at a particular meeting time and location. This includes lecture, laboratory, seminar, performance, and studio courses with regular face-to-face meetings each week where those meetings are the primary method of delivering course content and assessing student learning. The number of face-to-face meetings is based upon course credit hours. Traditional courses may be supplemented by announcements, notes, or assignments distributed through an online learning management system, such as Blackboard. Some courses may require at least one assessment given on campus or at an approved testing location; students will be given notification of this requirement on the syllabus.
Hybrid courses: Courses that meet a reduced number of times at a particular time and location during the semester compared to traditional courses. Also known as “blended courses”. The number of face-to-face meetings may vary according to the number of credit hours, course design and objectives, but hybrid courses will require at least the following number of on-campus
Final Faculty Senate Approved Form
| 1. BRIEF EXPLANATION OF PROPOSED CHANGE:
change the title and credit hours for BIO 116 |
| 2. CHECK ITEM(s) BELOW FOR CHANGES DESIRED: |
| ☐ New Degree Certification | ☐ Deletion of Degree or Certification |
| ☐ New or Revised Major | ☐ Deletion of Course |
| ☐ New or Revised Minor | ☐ Revised Degree or Certification |
| ☐ New Course(s) | ☒ Revised Course |
| ☐ Course Level (number) Change | ☐ Other (specify below): |
| I. Chair's/Director's Action:
☑ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change
Chair's (Signature): Date: 10/31/16 |
| II. Curriculum Committee Action:
☑ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change
Chairperson: (signature): Date: 10/24/2016 |
| III. Faculty Senate Action:
☐ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change
Senate President (signature): Date: |
| IV. Dean's Action:
☐ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change
Dean (signature): Date: |
| V. Vice President Academic Affairs (not required for courses):
☐ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change
Provost/VPAA (Signature): Date: |
| IV. President's Action (not required for courses):
☐ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change
President (Signature): Date: |
===== PAGE 21 =====
## COURSE CHANGE PROPOSAL
| ACADEMIC UNIT: MASC: Biology | DATE SUBMITTED: 10/10/2016 |
| 1. BRIEF EXPLANATION OF PROPOSED CHANGE:
Require students in the BIT option for the B.S. in Biology Degree at KSU, alignment of options within the biology major. |
| 2. CHECK ITEM(s) BELOW FOR CHANGES DESIRED: |
| ☐ New Degree Certification | ☐ Deletion of Degree or Certification |
| ☐ X New or Revised Major | ☐ Deletion of Courses |
| ☐ New or Revised Minor | ☐ Revised Degree or Certification |
| ☐ New Course(s) | ☐ Revised Course |
| ☐ Course Level (number) Change | ☐ Other (specify below): |
| I. Chair's/Director's Action: |
| ☑ Approved | ☐ Disapproved | ☐ Returned for Recommended Change |
| Chair's (Signature) | Date: 10/31/16 |
| II. Curriculum Committee Action: |
| ☑ Approved | ☐ Disapproved | ☐ Returned for Recommended Change |
| Chairperson: (signature): | Date: 10/24/16 |
| III. Faculty Senate Action: |
| ☐ Approved | ☐ Disapproved | ☐ Returned for Recommended Change |
| Senate President (signature): | Date: |
| IV. Dean's Action: |
| ☐ Approved | ☐ Disapproved | ☐ Returned for Recommended Change |
| Dean (signature): | Date: |
| V. Vice President Academic Affairs (not required for courses): |
| ☐ Approved | ☐ Disapproved | ☐ Returned for Recommended Change |
| Provost/VPAA (Signature): | Date: |
| IV. President's Action (not required for courses): |
| ☐ Approved | ☐ Disapproved | ☐ Returned for Recommended Change |
| President (signature): | Date: |
===== PAGE 23 =====
## COURSE CHANGE PROPOSAL
| 1. BRIEF EXPLANATION OF PROPOSED CHANGE:
Delete courses from the BIT option that created a two semester sequence or courses that were similar to existing courses in biology. |
| 2. CHECK ITEM(s) BELOW FOR CHANGES DESIRED: |
| ☐ New Degree Certification | ☐ Deletion of Degree or Certification |
| ☐ New or Revised Major | ☐ X Deletion of Courses |
| ☐ New or Revised Minor | ☐ Revised Degree or Certification |
| ☐ New Course(s) | ☐ Revised Course |
| ☐ Course Level (number) Change | ☐ Other (specify below): |
| I. Chair's/Director's Action:
☑ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change
Chair's (Signature): 76116
Date: 10/13/116 |
| II. Curriculum Committee Action:
☑ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change
Chairperson: (signature): N Miao Date: 10/24/116 |
| III. Faculty Senate Action:
☐ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change
Senate President (signature): Date: |
| IV. Dean's Action:
☐ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change
Dean (signature): Date: |
| V. Vice President Academic Affairs (not required for courses):
☐ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change
Provost/VPAA (Signature): Date: |
| IV. President's Action (not required for courses):
☐ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change
President (Signature): Date: |
===== PAGE 30 =====
## COURSE CHANGE PROPOSAL
| ACADEMIC UNIT: MASC: Biology | DATE SUBMITTED: 10/10/2016 |
| 1. BRIEF EXPLANATION OF PROPOSED CHANGE:
Revise BIO 431 and 432 for the Biotechnology (BIT) option for the B.S. Biology Degree by increasing hours and changing
the prerequisites and offering.
2. CHECK ITEM(s) BELOW FOR CHANGES DESIRED:
☐ New Degree Certification ☐ Deletion of Degree or Certification
☐ New or Revised Major ☐ Deletion of Course
☐ New or Revised Minor ☐ Revised Degree or Certification
☐ New Course(s) ☒ Revised Course
☐ Course Level (number) Change ☐ Other (specify below): |
| I. Chair's/Director's Action: |
| ☑ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change |
| Chair's (Signature) 7 B.S.A.D. | Date: 10/3/16 |
| II. Curriculum Committee Action: |
| ☑ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change |
| Chairperson: (signature): 10/24/16 | Date: 10/24/16 |
| III. Faculty Senate Action: |
| ☐ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change |
| Senate President (signature): ____________ Date: ____________ |
| IV. Dean's Action: |
| ☐ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change |
| Dean (signature): ____________ Date: ____________ |
| V. Vice President Academic Affairs (not required for courses): |
| ☐ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change |
| Provost/VPAA (Signature): ____________ Date: ____________ |
| IV. President's Action (not required for courses): |
| ☐ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change |
| President (Signature): ____________ Date: ____________ |
===== PAGE 35 =====
## COURSE CHANGE PROPOSAL
| Week | Date | Topics | Chapters | Remarks |
| 1 | Aug 24, 26 | Introduction: A survey of Biotechnology-from historical to current | | |
| 2 | Aug 31, Sep 2 | A textbook case of success: Genetech | | Lab Exercise: Each student identifies a specific product/biotech company and do a web-based research |
| 3 | Sep 7, 9 | Review on molecules of life and principles of biological processes, etc. | | Class discussion: students present their research |
| 4 | Sep 14, 16 | Continue on basic biochemistry | | Sep 16: 1st Exam |
| 5 | Sep 21, 23 | Principles of restriction endonuclease and ligase, electrophoresis, and other techniques commonly used in biotechnology | | Lab 1: Laboratory Safety; Preparation of buffers, reagents, etc.; |
| 6 | Sep 28, 30 | Continue...... | | Lab 2: Biotech in action: How human accidentally produced wine/alcohol |
| 7 | Oct 5, 7 | Expression vector and construction | | Continue... |
| 8 | Oct 12, 14 | Genomic libraries vs. cDNA libraries | | Oct 14: 2nd Exam |
| 9 | Oct 19, 21 | Continue...... | | Lab 3: DNA gel electrophoresis |
| 10 | Oct 26, 28 | PCR to gene editing | | Oct 26, 27: No class (Fall Break)\nLab 4: Plasmid DNA transformation |
| 11 | Nov 2, 4 | Continue and catch-up | | Lab 5: Colony isolation and plasmid DNA Extraction |
| 12 | Nov 9, 11 | Intellectual property, venture capital, and IPO | | Lab 6: “Scale up” of plasmid-positive colony |
| 13 | Nov 16, 18 | --Continue and catch-up | | Nov 18: 3rd Exam |
| 14 | Nov 23, 25 | A survey of career prospects in biotechnology by logging on companies' job sites, resume preparation, mock interview, etc. | | Nov 25-28: Thanksgiving Break\nLab 7: “Scale up” plasmid DNA extraction, restriction endonuclease digestion and DNA electrophoresis |
| 15 | Nov 30, Dec 2 | Catch-up, review, and discussion on issues/student’s lab results | | Catch-up and repeat experiments if needed |
| 16 | Dec 7, 9 | Open / Student project presentation | | |
| 17 | | | | Final Exam |
*The instructor reserves the right to make changes to (delete, add, or modify) this Syllabus as the semester progresses.**Any changes will be announced in class and/or posted on Blackboard.
===== PAGE 42 =====
# Kentucky State University College of Arts and Sciences Division of Mathematics and Sciences
Course: BIO-432
Course Title: Biotechnology II (4 credit hours)
PROFESSOR: Dr
. Li Lu SEMESTER: Spring, 2018
OFFICE: CH208C
CLASS TIME: TW 1:00-4:50PM
OFFICE PHONE: X6070
FAX: x6826
CLASSROOM: CH212 (Lecture); CH212 (Lab)
OFFICE HOURS
E-MAIL: alexander.lai@kysu.edu; li.lu@kysu.edu
## MISSION STATEMENTS:
The Objectives and Learning Outcomes of this course directly support the Mission of the University http://kysu.edu/about-ksu/mission-vision-core-values/; College A&S http://kysu.edu/academics/college-of-arts-and-sciences/ and Division of MASC: http://kysu.edu/academics/college-of-arts-and-sciences/mathematics-and-sciences/ and updated web page thereof.
## NOTICE TO STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES:
Any student who requires an accommodation due to a documented disability may contact the Disability Resource Center (DRC) at (502) 597-5076, or visit Hill Student Center, Suite 220C, to arrange for reasonable accommodations. The student is required to obtain verification from the DRC and deliver the signed DRC document to the instructor specifying the accommodations. The student is encouraged to complete this process at the beginning of the semester since an approval for accommodations is not retroactive. The accommodations become effective upon receipt of the DRC approval by the faculty member from the student. Additional information concerning the DRC and accommodations can be found at http://kysu.edu/administration-governance/finance-business/human-resources/disability-resources/
## COURSE PRE-REQUISITES, CO-REQUISITES, AND/OR OTHER RESTRICTIONS
Prerequisite: BIO431
## COURSE DESCRIPTION
A hands-on and in-depth course on Biotechnology. The principles and technology behind current products by biotechnology are discussed, and a serious of laboratory techniques are used as hands-on learning.
### 4. 000 Credit hours:
2.000 Lecture hours
4.000 Lab hours
## COURSE RATIONALE:
There is an explosive development in Biotechnology, including medical/pharmaceutical, industrial, and environmental fields. For a major in Biology in Biotechnology, an in-depth knowledge and basic skills in Biotechnology is an asset for jobs and for professional/graduate studies.
===== PAGE 43 =====
## COURSE OBJECTIVES:
This course is to provide in-depth knowledge about Biotechnology, plus a complementary laboratory sessions to gain hands-on skills. The theoretical aspects and basic principles are consolidated by conducting hands-on laboratory experiments commonly used in Biotechnology. The economic, business, and aspects on environmental impact will also be discussed.
## STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES:
1. Understand the basic principles in Biotechnology
2. Have a broad perspective on Biotechnology: What is it, how does it work, how it affects society and economic impact
3. Have acquired hands-on skills in several basic techniques involved in Biotechnology:
a. DNA manipulations: Restriction endonuclease digestion and ligation of DNA in the construction of expression vectors, transformation, purification, and electrophoresis
b. Protein manipulations: SDS-PAGE, western blot hybridization, ELISA, fluorescence protein analysis, etc.
c. Prokaryotic and eukaryotic cell culture and manipulations: bacterial subculture, animal cell culture and passage, microscopy including florescence microscopy
d. Chromatography and other purification technologies
4. Understand the principles of scaling up/industrial manufacturing/distribution process
5. Financial aspects/structures, intellectual protection, scalability of Biotechnology, and career potential/path for graduates
6. Tour of regional biotech companies [when and if available]
## REQUIRED TEXTS:
1. Biotechnology: Science for the New Millennium Revised Edition
2. Laboratory Manual for Biotechnology and Laboratory Science: The Basics
## BLACKBOARD:
Blackboard will be used to provide announcements, lecture materials (notes and presentations), assignments, and miscellaneous information for the course. Students should make sure that the email address listed for them in Blackboard is up-to-date since the instructor may use Blackboard-based email to provide additional information or announcements to students. Also, Smart Thinking provides 24/7 tutorial assistance.
## COURSE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS, EXPECTATIONS, POLICIES:
Attendance: Attendance is a major predictor for classroom success! Attendance will be taken by a sign-in sheet or roll call. Be sure your attendance has been noted before you leave class. One hundred (100) points are allocated for perfect attendance: If you have 100% attendance (excluding documented excuses), you earn the 100 points, 90% and 90 points, and so on.
Excessive absences will result in a grade penalty (see KSU Bulletin). Students will not be allowed to make up work missed due to non-excused absence. Students more than 15 minutes late to lab or class without a valid reason will be marked absent. In the event of an unexpected absence, make every effort to contact the instructor before, or as soon after the absence as is possible. Also see, "Student Handbook." http://kysu.edu/administration-governance/student-affairs/student-handbook/
Laboratory Periods: Laboratory periods will be spent using a variety of resources – A-V presentations, computer simulations, hands-on experimentation, etc. – to complement the topics discussed in lectures. Each laboratory period may begin with a short 5 to 10-minute Quiz. Students late to the lab will either miss the quiz entirely or will have a reduced time to complete the quiz. Special Requirement: each person in the laboratory is required to wear a lab coat.
===== PAGE 44 =====
Make-Ups: Make-up exams or quizzes will only be given with medical or university-related matters, by prior notification, and at my discretion.
Cheating and Plagiarism: Cheating and plagiarism will not be tolerated. To help alleviate cheating, all belongings will be placed away from seating areas before all exams. You will only need a pencil and calculator. If other items are needed, you will be informed in advance. I reserve the right to randomly assign seating at any time.
Cell Phones: The University has adopted Uniform Rules and Limits on Cell Phone (and Pager) Use in the Classroom and Library. If there are circumstances that make it vital for you to have a cell phone turned on and available, you should notify the instructor. Unauthorized cell phone use during an exam constitutes cheating.
| Week | Date | Topics | Chapters | Lab |
| 1 | Jan 18, 20 | Continue on “Survey of career opportunities in Biotech” | | Lab 7 continues... |
| 2 | Jan 25, 27 | Pharmaceutical industry and how new drugs are developed, approved, and marketing | | Lab 8: basic protein analysis |
| 3 | Feb 1, 3 | Continue... | | Lab 9: setting up of protein gel electrophoresis |
| 4 | Feb 8, 10 | Survey of protein purification technologies | | Continue... |
| 5 | Feb 15, 17 | Chemical industry and how new chemicals are synthesized by microbes | | Feb 15, 1st Exam |
| 6 | Feb 22, 24 | Continue... | | Lab 10: purification of protein expression from “scale-up experiment” |
| 7 | Feb 29, Mar 2 | Environmental issues: bioremediation and use of microbes | | Analysis of purified protein: SDS-PAGE, Western blot hybridization |
| 8 | Mar 7, 9 | Continue... | | Mar 9, 2nd Exam |
| 9 | Mar 14, 16 | No class | | Spring Break |
| 10 | Mar 21, 23 | Human genome, genetic diseases, and gene therapy | | Lab 11: Bioinformatics |
| 11 | Mar 28, 30 | Bioinformatics | | Continue... |
| 12 | Apr 4, 6 | —Continue and catch up | | Lab 12: PCR, RT-PCR, cDNA library construction |
| 13 | Apr 11, 13 | Principles in generating genomic libraries and cDNA libraries | | Apr 13, 3rd Exam |
| 14 | Apr 18, 20 | Disruptive agriculture: Monsanto and GMO | | Continue... |
| 15 | Apr 25, 27 | External speakers/visiting regional biotech companies | | Catch-up |
| 16 | May 2, 4 | Student Presentation/Review | | |
| 17 | | Final Exam Week | | Final Exam: TBA |
*The instructor reserves the right to make changes to (delete, add, or modify) this Syllabus as the semester progresses.**Any changes will be announced in class and/or posted on Blackboard.
===== PAGE 47 =====
## CURRICULAR/PROGRAM CHANGE TRACKING DOCUMENT
ACADEMIC UNIT: MASC: Biology
DATE SUBMITTED: 10/10/2016
| 1. BRIEF EXPLANATION OF PROPOSED CHANGE:
Revision of the Biotechnology (BIT) option for the B.S. in Biology at KSU.
2. CHECK ITEM(s) BELOW FOR CHANGES DESIRED:
☐ New Degree Certification ☐ Deletion of Degree or Certification
☐ X New or Revised Major ☐ Deletion of Courses
☐ New or Revised Minor ☐ Revised Degree or Certification
☐ New Course(s) ☐ Revised Course
☐ Course Level (number) Change ☐ Other (specify below): |
| I. Chair's/Director's Action:
☑ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change
Chair's (Signature) F Big data Date: 10/3/16 |
| II. Curriculum Committee Action:
☑ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change
Chairperson: (signature): Date: 10/24/16 |
| III. Faculty Senate Action:
☐ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change
Senate President (signature): Date: |
| IV. Dean's Action:
☐ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change
Dean (signature): Date: |
| V. Vice President Academic Affairs (not required for courses): |
| ☐ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change
Provost/VPAA (Signature): Date: |
| IV. President's Action (not required for courses): |
| ☐ Approved ☐ Disapproved ☐ Returned for Recommended Change
President (Signature): Date: |
===== PAGE 48 =====
| 3.000 Credit hours
3.000 Lecture hours |
| Levels: Undergraduate
Schedule Types: Combined Lecture/Lab |
| Div of Mathematics & Science Department
BIO 434 - Biotech IV: Adv Biotechnology
This course allows students to utilize and extend previously learned biotechnological principles and techniques used in industrial research and development, with special emphasis on pharmaceutical and value-added products. (Three hours of lecture and three hours of laboratory per week)
3.000 Credit hours
3.000 Lecture hours
3.000 Lab hours |
| Levels: Undergraduate
Schedule Types: Laboratory, Lecture and Laboratory, Lecture |
| Div of Mathematics & Science Department
BIO 435 - Global Persp in Biotechnology
This course critically surveys potential impacts of biotechnology from a global perspective, providing an understanding of issues and values information different viewpoints on biotechnology. (Three hours of lecture per week)
3.000 Credit hours
3.000 Lecture hours |
| Levels: Undergraduate
Schedule Types: Lecture |
| Div of Mathematics & Science Department
BIO 436 - Biotech Writing/Presentations
This course will focus on effective communication of ideas and research results in biotechnology, specifically publishing a scientific paper and making presentations at scientific meetings. Students will write a paper and present a talk on data they have been assigned at the beginning of the semester. (Three hours of lecture per week)
3.000 Credit hours
3.000 Lecture hours |
| Levels: Undergraduate
Schedule Types: Lecture |
===== PAGE 54 =====
Div of Mathematics & Science Department
## BIO 438 - Forensics
Lectures focus on the fundamental principles and concepts in disciplines of biology such as serology, entomology, and molecular biology relevant in forensic investigations. Students learn serological, microscopic, and DNA related techniques used in forensic sciences in laboratory.
(Four hours lecture/laboratory per week)
3.000 Credit hours
3.000 Lecture hours
Levels: Undergraduate
Schedule Types: Combined Lecture/Lab
Div of Mathematics & Science Department
===== PAGE 55 =====
NEW COURSE / COURSE CHANGE TRACKING DOCUMENT
ACADEMIC UNIT: Behavioral/Social Sciences DATE SUBMITTED: 10/6/2016
1. BRIEF EXPLANATION OF PROPOSED CHANGE:
2.
These six courses (PSY/SOC/POS/HIS 465, 466, 467, 468, 469, and 470) form the foundation for a minor in Intelligence Studies that BSS will offer interdisciplinary in response to the requirements of participation in the Bluegrass Intelligence Consortium. Participation in the Consortium will offer numerous benefits to KSU students and faculty, including free attendance at workshops and colloquia, opportunities to network with potential employers, opportunities for students and faculty to present their research at a state-wide venue, funding for student research and faculty development, and other benefits. (Additional information about the Bluegrass Intelligence Community Center of Academic Excellence and the Intelligence Consortium may be found at http://bgsiccae.eku.edu/).
### 2. CHECK ITEM(s) BELOW FOR CHANGES DESIRED:
New Course(s)
Returned for Recommended Change
(Date) 10/24/16
(Date) 10/24/16