From Elizabeth.Bradley@Colorado.EDU Wed Oct 27 08:20:02 2010 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on research.cs.colorado.edu X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 08:20:01 -0600 From: Liz Bradley To: Anne.Sheehan@Colorado.EDU, Martha.Hanna@Colorado.EDU, e.scott.adler@Colorado.EDU, helen.norton@Colorado.EDU, dduncan@Colorado.EDU, Bob.Sievers@Colorado.EDU, Stephen.Jones@Colorado.EDU, jennifer.bair@Colorado.EDU, lizb@research.cs.colorado.edu, David.Clough@Colorado.EDU, tsnow@casa.Colorado.edu, Michael.Bohn@Colorado.EDU, Cecelia.Barry@Colorado.EDU, Julie.Manning@Colorado.EDU, Joseph.Jupille@Colorado.EDU, carly.robinson@Colorado.EDU, marshall.smith@Colorado.EDU, Thomas.Higginbotham@Colorado.EDU cc: sierra.swearingen@Colorado.EDU Subject: October BFA IAC meeting follow-up Reply-to: lizb@cs.colorado.edu Dear All: At our meeting yesterday, we first welcomed new member Jennifer (Jenn) Bair from Sociology and then dove into a variety of short items: - The COIA meeting will be 21-23 January. I will ask Joe Rosse if he can represent CU there. - The transfer appeals committee charge is still on Joey White's desk. I will expedite. - The athletics admissions assessment committee is in full swing and working well. (Its purpose is to review prospects who may not be academically qualified *before* they visit; they also consider the overall academic situation of the team invovled during that process.) - Julie's conflict date disclosure procedure is working well. The only fall semester final-exam conflict that it brought to light involves the one skiier that we discussed & approved last time. There are three potential conflicts in the spring: golf & tennis if the teams qualify, and outdoor track. This is the same track conflict that comes up every year - we'll discuss it at a later meeting, probably January. - Julie & Dave briefed us on half a dozen NCAA legislative proposals that are up for a vote. (Our job here is to contribute faculty input to the decision makers who deliver CU's vote on each.) We'll discuss them in more depth at our next meeting; Julie will send them around before then. The main item of business for the day was the scholarship appeals committee document. We finished wordsmithing it, which consisted mainly of adding a "if the student does not hold up their end of this process, the appeal is denied by default" statement after the bullet about CU holding up its end of the process. We discussed where this committee should live, and the consensus was Ric Porreca's office (since Gwen, who chairs this committee, reports to Ric). I'll send around the final version in a day or two; we'll vote on it at the next meeting and Mike will then take it to Ric. Next meeting: the tuesday after Thanksgiving (11/30) at 4pm. The agenda will include voting on the scholarship appeals committee charge, discussing the NCAA proposals, hearing a budget report from Mike, and reviewing the BFA motions on the COIA report.