OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY
Open search box
A recording of the meeting is available.
Senators Present:
Senators Absent:
Ex-Officio members present: Mike Bailey (remote), Batten, Dahl (remote), Du Pont, Dugger, Goergen-Doll (remote), Hamblin, Mathew, Spitz, Valls
Non-Voting members present: Beachley, Palmer
Staff: Caitlin Calascibetta, Susie Sprinson
Guests: Grace Atebe (remote), Becky Bangs (remote), Nancy Barbour (remote), Stephanie Baugh (remote), Steph Bernell (remote), Vrushali Bokil (remote), Brendan Brucker (remote), Karren Cholewinski (remote), Kelsey Emard, Fred Fox (remote), Kali Furman (remote), Mary Gardner (remote), Romeo Lopez Gonzalez (remote), William Hankel (remote), Laurel Kincl (remote), Wade Marcum (remote), Jim Marquit (remote), Kirsten Petersen (remote), Adison Rowe (remote), Danielle Safonte (remote), Staci Simonich (remote), Caryn Stoess (remote), Roni Sue (remote), Carolyn Warfield (remote), Lou Wojcinski (remote), Nicole Wolf (remote), Amandra Wright (remote)
Comments from Faculty Senate President
Andrew informed the senate of two upcoming events. Andrew provided an update on the Faculty Senate Bylaws Workgroup and reminded the FS of the timeline for their work. He provided an update on the workgroup's conversations surrounding apportionment, explaining that there are challenges related to the apportionment calculation, and questions regarding the size, units, and representative model of the senate. A senator inquired about representation from research faculty. Andrew provided historical data on faculty representation between academic and professional faculty, as well as the current state of representation within the senate. Andrew posed a series of questions to attendees and encouraged individuals with ideas and feedback to contact the FS Office with their input.
Action Item – Curricular Proposals
Andrew introduced Jim Coakley, Co-Chair of the Curriculum Council to present 8 proposals.
Environmental Arts and Humanities Graduate Major (MA) – 96: There were no questions or discussion.
Motion to approve CIM proposal #96 to inactivate Environmental Arts and Humanities Graduate Major (MA). The motion passed with 103 votes in favor, 4 votes in opposition and 6 abstentions.
Innovation Management Undergraduate Major (BA, BS, HBA, HBS) – 454: There were no questions or discussion.
Motion to approve CIM proposal #454 to rename Innovation Management Undergraduate Major (BA, BS, HBA, HBS) to Innovation and Entrepreneurship Major (BA, BS, HBA, HBS). The motion passed with 110 votes in favor, 2 votes in opposition and 1 abstention.
Wildlife Science Graduate Major (MS, PhD) – 482: There were no questions or discussion.
Motion to approve CIM proposal #482 to inactivate Wildlife Science Graduate Major (MS, PhD). The motion passed with 106 votes in favor, 3 votes in opposition and 4 abstentions.
Science and Technology of Alcoholic Beverages Certificate – 725: There were no questions or discussion.
Motion to approve CIM proposal #725 to inactivate Science and Technology of Alcoholic Beverages Certificate. The motion passed with 108 votes in favor, 1 vote in opposition and 4 abstentions.
Rename Department: Statistics and Data Science – 842: An attendee asked about liaison conversation surrounding the data science proposal given that there is a biological data science program. Jim noted that liaisons were given the opportunity to review, and Andrew directed attendees to liaison comments within the materials provided in advance.
Motion to approve CIM proposal #842 to rename Department of Statistics to Department of Statistics and Data Science. The motion passed with 102 votes in favor, 6 votes in opposition and 3 abstentions.
Sports Business Undergraduate Major (BA, HBA, BS, HBS) – 875: There were no questions or discussion.
Motion to approve CIM proposal #875 Sports Business Undergraduate Major (BA, HBA, BS, HBS) - upgrading the option to a major. The motion passed with 109 votes in favor, 2 votes in opposition and 2 abstentions.
Computer Science - Applied Undergraduate Major (BS, HBS) – 878: There were no questions or discussion.
Motion to approve CIM proposal #878 Computer Science - Applied Undergraduate Major (BS, HBS) - upgrading the post-bac option to a stand-alone major. The motion passed with 107 votes in favor, 2 votes in opposition and 4 abstentions.
Data Science Undergraduate Major (BS, HBS) – 903: There were no questions or discussion.
Motion to approve CIM proposal #903 Data Science Undergraduate Major (BS, HBS) - new Undergraduate major. The motion passed with 96 votes in favor, 8 votes in opposition and 9 abstentions.
Jim provided a summary of the Curriculum Council's work to-date.
Action Item – Proposal to Combine the Advancement of Teaching Committee (AOT) and the Online Education Committee (OEC)
Andrew explained the background behind a proposal to combine the OEC and AOT into a reimagined "Excellence in Teaching" committee. A senator asked if this new committee can provide a sufficient venue for discussions surrounding online education. An attendee noted that this new committee may not be able to sustainably address the topics that the OEC and AOT discuss currently. Andrew noted that the proposal had been extensively discussed with the leadership of the two effected committees and other stakeholders, who believe that a combined committee will be a more efficient way to promote excellence in teaching across modalities.
Motion to combine the Advancement of Teaching Committee and the Online Education Committee to create the Excellence in Teaching Committee. The motion passed with 78 votes in favor, 24 votes in opposition and 6 abstentions.
Update on ADA Laws and Digital Accessibility
Andrew introduced Ashley Holmes, Associate Vice Provost for Teaching and Learning, and Gabriel Merrell, Director of Access & Deputy ADA Coordinator. Gabriel explained the purpose and regulatory impact of a new DOJ rule that adds technical standards for web and mobile accessibility. Gabriel explained that public entities will need to comply by April 24, 2026. Gabriel noted that the rule applies to anything viewed in a web browser or mobile app. He noted that traditional accommodation approaches will generally be non-compliant, and entities will need to be proactive with accessibility. Gabriel explained the 5 core exemptions to the new rule.
Ashley explained that academic faculty should focus on starting new documents as accessible, archiving unused materials, and prioritizing revisions to their existing materials. Ashley explained that additional resources will be provided during upcoming trainings. She highlighted more advanced accessibility tools that may require additional support and training. Ashley closed her remarks with a preview of the compliance timeline and reminders about upcoming webinars.
An attendee asked about support for faculty who already have challenges with materials. Gabriel explained that the Disability Action Steering Group is discussing this issue and will make recommendations to the Provost and President. Ashley also noted that there are efforts to discuss additional efforts for collaboration between Ecampus, Disability Access Services (DAS), and other related stakeholders. A senator noted challenges, including increased cost, they faced in creating accessible materials for an Ecampus course. Gabriel noted that it is unrealistic to reach 100% compliance when working on accessibility, but increased cost will be considered when sharing findings with the Provost and President. A senator asked if OSU is budgeting any FTE to work on this. Gabriel explained that no decision has been made at this time. It was asked if AI can help with these efforts, and Gabriel noted that while great strides have been made, most AI-generated content will still require human review. A senator asked about making PDF articles accessible, and Gabriel noted that staff within the library can help with these types of tasks. Additional questions were asked about approaches for making documents accessible. A senator asked if students are serving on the steering group. Gabriel explained that students are not currently serving on the committee, but the technical standards should be device- and software-neutral.
Core Education Course Caps
Andrew introduced Alix Gitelman to present on Core Education course caps. Alix explained the history behind her presentation, noting that she began to hear concerns from deans about course capacities as they began to prepare for the new Core Education. Alix noted that the plan presented today has been developed through ongoing conversations with stakeholders and has been vetted with the Faculty Senate (FS) Executive Committee (EC).
Alix explained the concerns from schools and departments are regarding:
Pedagogical justification
Budget
Flexibility and exceptions
Alix explained impacts and burdens to Difference, Power and Oppression (DPO) courses and Arts/Humanities courses. Alix explained the plan for addressing course capacity challenges, explaining that OSU will:
Pause LOCR course caps for Arts and Humanities (General and Global) and Difference, Power, and Oppression (Foundation and Advanced) for two years.
Introduce interim course caps, and allow exceptions
During the pause:
Research pedagogical foundation of course caps by field (beginning F25)
Engage Assessment team to do early evaluation of student learning (beginning W26)
Evaluate necessity for long-term adjustment of course caps (beginning F26)
Alix outlined additional detail about the plan:
Arts & Humanities
For two academic years, the course cap will move to 55 (+15 from Learning Outcome, Criteria and Rational [LOCR] document).
DPO-Foundations
For two academic years, move course cap to 60 (+10 from LOCR) in sections without recitation; for sections using recitations, caps elevated to 35 (+10 from LOCR).
DPO-Advanced
Where no Baccalaureate Core equivalent exists, align with DPOF approach. For two academic years, the course caps move to 35 (+10 from LOCR) in sections without recitation; for sections using recitations, caps elevated to 35 (+10 from LOCR).
A senator noted that the rationale within the LOCR was based on best practices and educational research, and that teaching DPO courses can be intense and requires “engaging students in critical reflection, specific to their field of study, on the complexity of the structures, institutions and ideologies that sustain systemic oppression.” They asked how faculty can provide quality teaching, support retention efforts, and align to prior FS decisions, with higher course caps. Alix explained that there are differing opinions on the validity of the practices noted in the LOCR. The DPO Director noted that OSU needs to balance budget constraints with maintaining OSU’s culture of strong instruction, and the plan is not designed to be permanent.
A senator shared comments and concerns, noting that this may create an additional burden for grading, and some faculty may consider these changes inequitable. The senator further noted that this plan may discourage faculty from proposing Core Education courses, and the full FS was not consulted in the development of the plan. Additionally, it was noted that faculty were originally encouraged to not consider budget in the early phases of Core Education development. Alix and Andrew noted that the EC was involved in multiple discussions around potential solutions and that the current Core Education caps were not sustainable under OSU’s current budgetary situation. Andrew reminded the FS that the senate could vote on potential changes, but Alix’s proposed plan is designed to be temporary, and any permanent change to the LOCR would come back to the FS in two years for an official vote.
Additional concerns were raised regarding faculty workload, budget, and the sensitive nature of DPO courses, and Alix encouraged faculty to work closely with their unit leaders on these topics. A senator noted that while the course caps are being raised, it is not a requirement for any unit to raise course capacities to those caps, and some units have developed plans for meeting the current caps without undue burden on faculty. A senator suggested that the evaluation of the course caps should include an analysis of impact to both faculty and students. In closing, Alix noted that the research will be done in partnership the FS.
Provost’s Quarterly Report
Belinda Batten shared that there are four final candidates for the new provost position and an announcement should be made soon. She acknowledged recent concerns and frustrations with the change in course caps and noted that the budget landscape has changed in recent years. Belinda reminded the senate that Prosperity Widely Shared (PWS) should serve as OSU’s guiding star, and it is crucial to prioritize student success. Belinda provided an overview of expected changes to the OSU budget, noting that additional information will be available later this month, but units can expect a minimum budget cut of 3.2% and a maximum cut of 7%. Belinda highlighted recent enrollment trends within Ecampus and the graduate school. Belinda provided reminders about the FY2026 merit increase program, the promotion and tenure cycle, and ongoing executive searches. A senator noted that reducing the number of administrative hires could help ongoing budget issues. Belinda noted that OSU considers the appropriate balance of administrative hires, and has decided to eliminate or not fill vacant administrative roles in recent years.
Matters Arising
Due to time constraints, there was no new business.
Adjournment
With no further discussion or business before the Faculty Senate, Andrew adjourned the meeting.
A008 Kerr Administration Building
Oregon State University
Corvallis OR 97331-8655
(541) 737-4344 (office)
(541) 737-4489 (fax)
Contact the Faculty Senate
Land Acknowledgement