UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS ACADEMIC SENATE

VOLUME XXX, No. 1

MINUTES

SPECIAL MEETING OF THE REPRESENTATIVE ASSEMBLY

OF THE DAVIS DIVISION OF THE ACADEMIC SENATE

Tuesday, October 9, 2001

3:00 – 5:00 p.m.

Cabernet Room, Silo

Chair Jeffery C. Gibeling welcomed everyone to the first meeting of the Representative Assembly for 2001-02. A roster of members present and absent is attached as Appendix I to these minutes. He said the purpose of the meeting was to discuss the proposal from the Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools (BOARS) that the University employ a comprehensive review in selecting undergraduate applicants for admission to individual campuses. The proposal from BOARS would become a statewide policy if adopted by the Regents. The proposal from the Davis Admissions and Enrollment Committee is the implementation policy for the BOARS proposal.

Chair Gibeling provided background information with a Power Point presentation (available on the web at http://academicsenate.ucdavis.edu/senate/documents.htm) which included a summary of the present guidelines and the BOARS proposal.

Professor Patrick Farrell, Chair, Admissions and Enrollment Committee, then reviewed the history and chronology of comprehensive review with a Power Point presentation (available on the web as referenced above). He said at Davis, 60% of all admits have been selected based only on a ranking according to high school GPA’s and SAT exam scores. He noted that Davis like most other UC campuses, already uses a form of comprehensive review for the remaining percentage of admitted students (Tier 2). He said the Admissions and Enrollment Committee met over the summer to continue developing the local implementation policies of the BOARS proposal and worked closely with the Office of Undergraduate Admissions who provided data and simulations. A key element is that the local procedures would result in the campus admitting essentially the same students for Fall 2001 under either the existing or proposed procedures.

Discussion ensued in which P. Farrell responded to questions and provided clarification. Professor Terence Murphy subsequently moved endorsement of the BOARS proposal. The motion was seconded.

Professor Kevin Hoover spoke against the motion stating that the proposal was fast tracked, worked on in a rush during the summer by the Admissions and Enrollment Committee and the Executive Council and then this Special Meeting of the Representative Assembly was called rather than waiting for the regular meeting of the Representative Assembly. He said he did not believe there had been adequate time to consider this proposal thoroughly and carefully.

A member asked what the consequences would be if the BOARS proposal was not approved by this body? Kevin Hoover, Chair, Committee on Elections, Rules and Jurisdiction responded that the vote on the BOARS proposal is non-binding and that if this body does not enact new local procedures we will presumably operate under the old procedures. Chair Gibeling noted that if the BOARS proposal is approved by the Regents, the campus must adopt new procedures that are in compliance with that policy. He also reminded the Assembly members that when SP1 was rescinded it was a very emotionally and politically charged event and at that time President Atkinson promised that the faculty would consider changing the admissions procedures. J. Gibeling said there is an external pressure being exerted on the University as a whole to make this change.

Vice Chancellor Carol Wall also reminded the Assembly of the fact that when the Regents enacted SP1 it resulted in the faculty losing authority for admissions. She said given the neutrality of the proposal, simply regaining the authority for admissions would be worth voting for this proposal. Otherwise, the Regents are likely not to offer it back to the faculty again.

A member suggested the possibility of approving the motion but also writing a letter expressing displeasure of the fast-tracking, and the lack of sufficient information to enable the faculty to vote responsibly.

There was a call for the question and it was determined there was no longer a quorum.

In lieu of this, K. Hoover said the only option remaining was to adjourn the meeting. He said a vote is no longer an option and the Chair cannot forward a vote to the Academic Council.

A member asked about the possibility of a mail ballot. It was determined that there is not enough days remaining to meet the October 31 Assembly (Universitywide) meeting.

Chair Gibeling said the rest of the campuses will in effect vote at the Academic Council meeting tomorrow. If the BOARS proposal is approved by the Academic Council by a majority, it will go to the Assembly. He said he would appreciate some guidance as to how the Davis Division views the proposal.

Wendy Silk concurred and said she would like a sense vote so she can report to her department colleagues. K. Hoover said such a vote has no official standing.

Chair Gibeling declared the meeting adjourned. He then asked those present as a town hall meeting if they favored the BOARS proposal. A majority of those present raised their hands indicating support of the BOARS proposal.

Chair Gibeling thanked everyone present for their participation and dedication to the task. The discussion ended at 4:55 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Anita Oberbauer, Secretary

Representative Assembly of the

Davis Division of the Academic Senate

Attachment