Joint Boards Articulation Commission


Meeting Summary Notes

January 15, 2003

Conference Call


Members Present

Mary Kay Tetreault, Portland State University, Chair
Jim Arnold, Oregon University System
Michele Sandlin, Oregon State University
Harris Shelton, Eastern Oregon University
Karen Sprague, University of Oregon
Glenda Tepper, Clackamas Community College
Elaine Yandle-Roth, Community Colleges and Workforce Development

Mary Kay Tetreault called the meeting to order at 9:04 a.m. and Jim Arnold confirmed those participating in the call.


1. Announcements and Suggestions for the Agenda

No announcements or suggestions were offered.

2. Minutes of the December 18, 2002, Meeting

The minutes of the December 2002 meeting were discussed. Karen Sprague suggested that the meeting record be modified to more accurately reflect the status of proposed “fixes” for the AA/OT, namely that the fixes were not necessarily discussed, proposed or endorsed by the JBAC at the December meeting, but were, rather, the result of discussions at other meetings by the JBAC and the Student Transfer Committee. Arnold accepted agreed-upon language and stated that the December minutes would be immediately modified to reflect the group’s wishes. [Note: Corrected minutes were posted to the web later in the morning of January 15, 2003.]

3. Report from the December 19, 2002, Academic Council Meeting

Arnold reported that the OUS Academic Council participated in yet another spirited discussion about the merits of the proposed AS/OT-Bus, as endorsed by the Statewide Business Chairs and University Deans group as well as the community colleges’ Council of Academic Administrators. The outcome of the discussion was “acceptance” of the proposal (after minor modifications were suggested; the revised version is available at and the Council consented to have it forwarded for approval by the State Board of Education, which will make it the second agreed-upon statewide transfer degree.

Since the Academic Council meeting, Arnold has initiated contact with each of the business schools/programs for approval of the listed prerequisites on page 3 of the degree proposal. Additionally, he has started drafting the docket write-up to be considered by the Board of Education, presumably sometime this spring.

Tetreault noted that the provosts responded positively to the message that the degree offering is one desired by students and that it could give some of them an advantage in terms of their employment goals.

Harris Shelton inquired as to the process for keeping the university prerequisites section up-to-date, and Arnold responded that that issue had been thoroughly discussed. At least once a year, it is anticipated that the Statewide Business Chairs and University Deans will review the degree requirements, and any changes from the universities will be reflected in the (up-to-the-minute) degree guidelines document appearing on the JBAC website. Email notification would be made to the community colleges when substantive university changes have been made.

4. EDI Implementation

Sandlin reported that there has not been much movement on the statewide EDI implementation initiative since her last report to the group. There is an “informal team” in the state addressing implementation, with representatives from both OUS and community college campuses. The team made presentations to community colleges and independent colleges/universities in November regarding the initiative. There is also coordination with the Department of Education, but there is a new tech person there so not much progress has been made. The primary players so far have been Oregon State University, Portland State University, University of Oregon, and so some extent, Portland Community College. There appears a “wait and see” approach to further work until after the January 28th election, though the OUS campuses are still talking with their community college partners, as well as high schools, about proceeding.

5. JBAC Workplan Review

Yandle-Roth reported that she and Arnold had met to make some modifications to the workplan following the feedback from the last JBAC meeting. There is now an “activities to do” column, as well as a “status” column to allow us to see where we’re at and how we’ve done. Additionally, some language was changed to make the verbs more consistent, as well as some other minor changes. Is this version responsive to the requests made by the group last time? Yes, it seems to be.

6. Suggestions for February Agenda and Other Items

Tetreault requested that an item be include on the February agenda addressing the production of the JBAC minutes from month to month. Arnold noted that he had the following items: discussion of the data report; a presentation on the “general education requirements dilemma” by Andy Duncan; the transfer degree policy options document requested at the December JBAC meeting; and a first look at a draft of a proposal for an AS/OT in computer science. Yandle-Roth noted that the Student Transfer Committee report should be on the agenda.

Sandlin asked about her assignment to provide documents relating to the generic AS/OT and Arnold replied that he would like them in time for distribution to the Student Transfer Committee members prior to the January 29th meeting.

Sandlin also noted that if various viable AS/OT degrees in disciplinary areas evolve, then the need for a generic AS/OT may be obviated.

7. Meeting Schedule and Adjourn

The next meeting will be held at Oregon State University in February. The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 a.m.


The remaining meetings for the year are as follows:
February 19, 2003                10:00 - 2:00 at OSU
March 19, 2003                     9:00 - 11:00 Conference Call
April 16, 2003                        9:00 - 11:00 Conference Call
May 14, 2003                        9:00 - 11:00 Conference Call
June 11, 2003                       10:00 - 2:00 at OIT Metro



Prepared by Jim Arnold
OUS Academic Affairs
January 15, 2003