MEETING DATE: 10-13-2021

1:00-3:00 p.m.

MEETING LOCATION: Join Webex meeting ID: 1202328335

Password: ivQPMmG@274 (US) +1 415-655-0001 (toll)

Access code: 120 232 8335

(US) +1 702-895-4000 (toll)

Access code: 120 232 8335 1202328335@unlv.webex.com

Committee: James Navalta (Chair), Han-Fen Hu, Sean Boyd, Heather Dahl, Lawrence Larmore, Kimberly Mellen, Murray Mackenzie, Gail Sammons (James proxy), Alicia Rico, Mary Bondmass, Erin Rosenberg, Shichun Huang, Maryann Overcamp-Martini, Corrin Sullivan, Godson Adjovu, Hilla Ben-Shimon

Ex-Officio: Emily Lin (Graduate College), April Fox (Graduate College) Sam Fugazzotto (Office of the Registrar), Ruth Garay (Office of the Registrar)

Invitees: Josue Epane, Corrin Sullivan

Agenda

1.     Committee Business

1.     Introductions

2.     Proxy Form Link: Grad Committee Proxy form

2.     New Courses

1.     HCA - 738 Research Design in Healthcare Administration (Josue Epane)

Pre-requisites updated. First offering of course updated (Fall 2022). Note to update syllabus (remove MS banner). Motion, seconded, passed.

2.     PEDS - 1900 Pediatric Rheumatology (Corrin Sullivan)

Discussion about noting that number of credits was equivalent to number of weeks in syllabus. Motion, seconded, passed.

3.     Course Changes and Deletions

1.     AAE - 695 Special Topics in Architectural Design

2.     HCA - 701 U.S. Healthcare System: Programs and Policies

3.     HCA - 716 Health Care Accounting and Finance

4.     HCA - 717 Human Resources Management of Health Care Organizations

5.     HCA - 721 Advanced Health Care Finance

6.     HCA - 761 Health Care Law and Ethics for Managers

7.     ME - 729 Advanced Robotics

8.     MED - 901 Longitudinal Interleaved Clerkship 1

9.     MED - 902 Longitudinal Interleaved Clerkship 2

10.  MED - 903 Longitudinal Interleaved Clerkship 3

11.  MED - 904 Longitudinal Integrated Clerkship 4 Title updated (to Interleaved)

12.  MIS - 769 Big Data Analytics for Business

13.  MIS - 776 Business Intelligence

4.     Informational Items

1.     Contingency approval

During the current UNLV Graduate Course Review Committee (GCRC) meetings, course proposals are reviewed and may in cases receive contingent approvals pending certain items and review. For example, some of the proposals have missing votes or some of the proposed course changes require changes to programs. In these contingent proposals, the Graduate Curriculum Manager manages the missing items before moving them forward in Curriculog.

However, there have been recent cases in which proposed program changes that involve subsequent course changes have been problematic. Although the proposed changes were approved by the GCRC, the follow through actions of submitting program changes have not occurred. For example, a proposed course change necessitates a change to the particular program. The consequence of not submitting the program changes within the academic year impacted by the course change would be discrepancies in the Catalog and confusion among both faculty and students.

To remedy this, for proposals that require subsequent actions (such as program changes, missing votes), the GCRC may opt to designate a proposal as Contingent Approval status. To move a program change at the Contingent Approval status to a Full Approval status, the missing items must be satisfied and approved by the GCRC with documented GCRC meetings/minutes. The Graduate Committee Manager will still continue to manage the missing items and report to the GCRC.

Among other things, this process of documenting the authentic status of proposals allows for greater transparency. In sum, the GCRC decisions for proposals are:

1.     Full Approval

2.     Contingent Approval

3.     Tabled

4.     Disapproval

The status of each item on the agenda will be clearly documented in meeting minutes. Those that are tabled or receive contingent approval will automatically appear on each subsequent agenda until the proposal is resolved in some way.

COMMITTEE ENDORSES CONTINGENCY APPROVAL AS FORMALIZED PROCESS DESCRIBED HERE

2. Technical review

The purpose of the technical review step is to provide timely feedback on proposals so that they adhere to the standards of acceptable program builds and align to UNLV graduate curricular policies, practices and guidelines. One of the major goals of conducting technical reviews is not only to ensure that they align to best graduate curricular design practices but also prevent delays in the approval/implementation process.

Having this early feedback in the proposal review process decreases the chance for rejection of the proposal at the University level. For example, without a technical review and if the proposal was rejected at the University level, the proposals would be pushed back to the originator step which would require the proposal undergoing all approval steps again. Without providing feedback early in the review process, the proposal risks rejection at the University level resulting in delays in the approval and implementation as well as excess and duplicative efforts exerted needlessly among faculty and all curricular approvers.

Please note that technical reviews do not focus on content but rather on the elements including but not limited to: objectives of quality Catalog builds; accreditation standards; student and faculty policies and procedures; administrative, technological, and systemic capabilities for implementation, management, and operationalization of the academic goals reflected in a proposal; ethical aspects that may come to harm students and/or faculty; contradictions within proposals and any issues potentially interfering with the successful progression of students; compliance with initiatives of other affected UNLV offices such as: the office of online education, academic compliance, international students, Registrar’s office, VPAP office, service learning, libraries, among others; best practices in the design and presentation of the standardized graduate catalog, including terminology that supports diversity and inclusivity, etc.

Technical reviews are typically conducted within one week by the Associate Dean of the Graduate College, Registrar’s office, and the Grad Curriculum and Assessment Manager. Other UNLV offices are also triggered at the technical review step. For example, when there are changes to the course that may be related to service learning, a trigger email is sent to the Service Learning office to work with proposers prior to the proposal reaching the GCRC step.

COMMITTEE ENDORSES TECHNICAL REVIEW TO BE CONDUCTED IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING PROPOSAL SUBMISSION STEP AND AS A FORMALIZED PROCESS DESCRIBED HERE