ANNUAL REPORT OF THE GENERAL COLLEGE COMMITTEE

Date: May 30, 1984
To: James LeRoy Smith
From: Charles Garrison

Membership of the committee (including ex-officio members):

Margaret Capen, Business

Herbert Carlton, Political Science (vice chair)

Robert Christian, Biology

Charles Garrison, Sociology/Anthropology/Economics (chair)

W.T. Gartman, Allied Health

Palmyra Leahy, Geography and Planning (leave of absence. beginning 1/84)
Gregory Ross, Philosophy (replacement for Leahy)

Nancy Mayberry, Foreign Languages (secretary)

Ex-officio membership:
Dean of the General College, Donald Bailey
Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs or an appointed representative,

Myra Cain
Vice Chancellor for Student Life or an appointed representative, Elmer
Meyer

Committee meetings (dates and members absent):

August 22

September 14 (Cain, Meyer)
October 19 (Meyer*)

November 16 (Capen*, Gartman)
February 15 (Capen, Cain, Ross)
March 21

*excused
Dates of reports to the Faculty Senate during the year:
March 27, 1984

Specific instructions, if any, given to the committee by the Faculty
Senate other than those found in the committee's organizational charge:

None

A brief statement of committee organization, subcommittees, research
agencies other than the Faculty Senate:

Ad hoe subcommittee appointed previous year on advisor evaluation made a

cee een

report; ad hoc subcommittee to study models of approved required courses

dropped. Committee functioned as unit

 
List of committee accomplishments including recommendations made to
agencies other than the Faculty Senate: ed

Revision and refinement of voluntary advisor evaluation form; survey of
sample departments.

Registration procedures and impact in General College discussed.
Reviewed orientation procedures.

Citation of Senate resolution numbers that originated with the
committee:

84—19
Proposals and/or business to be carried over to next year:

Consideration of proposal submitted by Herbert Carlton: suggested
considerations designed to improve General College advising.

Evaluation of committee:
Structure, duties, functions and personnel all acceptable.
Suggestions for improving the effectiveness of the committee:

None