Members attending: P. Stearns (Chair), A. Fortino, E. Dawson, D. Boehm-Davis, M. Goor, S. Nash, P. Becker,
J. Finkelstein, J. Maxwell, J. Offutt, D. Holisky, D. Campbell (Secretary)

Visitors: L. Schwatrzstein (Provost), B. Davis (Admissions), C, Hill (Provost)

I. Call to order

Stearns called the meeting to order at 1:30.

II. Announcements

A. Stearns announced that SCHEV will reconsider the PhD in Bioinformatics on Friday, the other programs will be before them on 20 March.

B. Stearns reminded everyone that tuition increases will impact the amount of tuition aid given to graduate students.

C. Stearns announced that the EVPP degree track that was tabled in January will hopefully be back on the agenda for the March meeting.

III. Approval of January 2002 minutes

Minutes were approved as written.

IV. Old Business

None.

V. New Business

A. SPP courses for approval

• New course: ITRN 718 - approved.
  
• Modified courses: PUBP 726, 796, LRNG 602, 672, 674 - approved.

VI. Discussion Items

A. Va Tech graduate programs
Offutt handed out copies of Va Tech's graduate offerings from their campus in Northern Virginia. He expressed concern that many of their programs directly compete with GMU's programs and in so doing they are competing for the same base of potential students. There was general discussion about the possible causes, methods, and results of this competition. No conclusion was reached and no action was taken by the Council. Offutt brought it up so that all would be aware of the situation and so it could be acted on at a higher level.

B. Graduate assistant allocations
Hill reported on the recommendations of the committee on Graduate Assistants. There was discussion on the formula used to allocate GRAs and GTAs to the units, and on using grad students as adjunct faculty vs. GTAs. This subject will be discussed further at the March meeting

C. Interdisciplinary GRA awards
Hill presented the peer review results of the Interdisciplinary GRA submissions. He stated that there is enough money to fund all five requests, but the Council agreed that not all should necessarily be awarded if the strength of their submissions did not justify it. The Council decided that three of the five were obvioulsy qualified for the award, and the other two should be sent back to the reviewers for a face-to-face regrading of their packages.

VII. Adjournment at 2:30

TOP