Site-wide links

These materials are copyright Rochester Institute of Technology.

Copyright, disclaimer, and contact information, available via the links in the footer of our site.

Academic Senate

Academic Support and Student Affairs Committee - Charges


Home » Standing Committees » Academic Support

The Academic Support Committee shall monitor and review the academic services, computer services, cultural programs, and museum and library services of the university. Members from the Committee shall also serve as liaison for the Senate with appropriate administrative officers, committees, and councils of the university, and shall act in conjunction with the Academic Affairs Committee in the formulation of policies and proposals to be submitted to the Academic Senate. The Academic Support Committee shall consist of eight members, each to be elected by his or her collegial faculty, one member of the educational development faculty elected by that group, three members at large elected by the Academic Senate, and Provost or his or her delegate (ex-officio, voting).

  1. Examine having a representative from ILI on the Academic Support Committee.

  2. Review the Information Security Policy (Section C8.1)

  3. Nominate a faculty member of the committee to serve on the Web Advisory Committee with an eye towards evaluating the aesthetics of the RIT website and the ease of use.

  4. Work with ILI and faculty affairs to undertake a comprehensive review of intellectual property policies as it pertains to online learning.

  5. Evaluate whether the mental health needs of our students are being adequately served. In particular, is the university appropriately staffed with mental health professionals; does student insurance meet the needs of our students seeking such care?

  6. In conversation with Academic Affairs, look into implementation issues of the Smart Evals system, including:

    • Is it possible to re-examine the question of who at RIT has access to the results from the SRATE SmartEval system? Currently, the only people who can access this data are (1) an individual instructor, who can view his/her results; (2) the department chair who can view the department results; (3) the dean and associate dean who can view the college results. This bypasses the Dean's Assistant and other staff who need access to the system to print tenure and promotion materials. These staff members are routinely trusted with RIT's most confidential records and information. Academic Senate voted to limit access. Apparently, there was no consideration given to standard office procedures, and to the bottleneck that is created when trusted staff are suddenly not trusted. Given the current rules, it will require either a Department Chair, Associate Dean, or Dean to spend valuable time locating, compiling, and printing these records. Surely, this was not the intent of Academic Senate.
    • A mechanism be created to increase participation in student evaluations (i.e. not releasing final grade until evaluation is complete; or enrollment suspended until evaluation is completed). Participation can be low, <50%, and the common incentive for those to participate might be a negative assessment. In addition, examine the cost of operating SmartEvals and make that amount known to the faculty. In addition, determine the validity and reliability of SmartEvals and to what extent administrators use it to evaluate faculty teaching.