Present: Kweku Bryson, Ed Coffman, William Daughtrey, George Gray, David
Harless, Gabriel Ramirez, Associate Dean for Research and Graduate
Studies and Ph.D. Program Faculty Advisor Allen Lee, and guests Ruth
Epps, Glenn Gilbreath, Rich Redmond, Anson Seers, and Larry Williams.

Chair Gabriel Ramirez called the meeting to order at 12:05.

Minutes of the December 3, 2001 meeting were approved as amended. A
faculty member had asked that the minutes reflect Allen Lee's title as
Ph.D. Program Faculty Advisor as it is in that role that Associate Dean
Lee serves as ex-officio member of the committee according to current
School of Business By-laws. Current and future minutes will reflect both
titles.

Ramirez noted that the November 13, 1997 re-accreditation letter from
AACSB requested an interim report, to be delivered to AACSB by October
1, 2002, that would address matters "including accomplishment of
assessing the effectiveness of the revised Ph.D. Mission." In October
2001, the Ph.D Committee had asked department chairs of departments with
a Ph.D. Program major to work with their Ph.D. Program Committee
representative to draft preliminary reports (with information specific
to the different majors) to address the seven specific questions from
AACSB:

1. How much have the faculty embraced the desire to attract into the
Ph.D. programs, students who are capable of development as both
effective teachers and researchers?
2. How has the Ph.D. Curriculum changed because of the focus on both
effective teaching and research?
3. How has the process for selecting faculty for the Ph.D. programs
matured?
4. What evidence is there to demonstrate maintenance of appropriate
faculty research capability and output with respect to the refined
definition for the Ph.D. programs?
5. What are the results of implementing a refined scholarship criterion
for service as a chair or member of a dissertation committee?
6. How does the placement of graduate from the Ph.D. programs support
the refined mission?
7. What are the results of further implementation of the faculty roles
and rewards process that were developed by the Strategic Planning
Committee?

Chairs Ruth Epps, Glenn Gilbreath, and Rich Redmond were invited to the
meeting to present their preliminary reports.

Ramirez asked Accounting Department Chair Epps to present their
preliminary report. Epps noted that there is a separate accreditation
process for accounting programs, and she had on January 8, 2002
submitted a response to a accounting accreditation request for
information. She further indicated that the material in that report was
confidential until the accrediting body had reviewed the information and
replied. Epps did indicate that she had brought information relevant to
the SACS assessment. A great deal of discussion followed on the
question of whether the information on the accounting major should also
be included in the October 2002 interim report to AACSB.

It was noted that one source of confusion was the many assessments and
reviews taking place simultaneously: 1) Interim report for AACSB, 2)
Ph.D. Program Committee Comprehensive Review, 3) SACS Assessment, and 4)
School of Business Strategic Planning Assessment.

Ramirez called on Management Department Chair Gilbreath to present their
preliminary report. Gilbreath distributed copies of a 26 page report.
Gilbreath reviewed the changes made in the major since 1997: a
different major (Organization Behavior compared to a previous Management
major), new faculty, new curriculum, and so on. Several members
commented on the thoroughness and quality of the report.

Ramirez asked Information Systems Chair Redmond to present their
preliminary report. Redmond noted that the Information Systems major had
also changed substantially since 1997. He also noted the new faculty
involved in the program and noted that curriculum changes were in
process. He indicated that the report was incomplete and some further
work was required. Ramirez indicated that it will now be necessary to
begin the process of synthesizing the reports. He asked members to read
the reports and make suggestions concerning content, omissions, and so
on.

There was discussion concerning a recent Department of Management vote
to suspend the Ph.D. major in Organizational Behavior. Members of the
Ph.D. Committee, with the exception of George Gray, agreed that no
change in the program could occur until such change was approved in the
same way as any other curriculum request would have to be approved: A
proposal (for deletion of Graduate Catalog copy, putting courses in the
course bank, or the like) would have to be submitted and approved by the
Ph.D. Program Committee, the Dean of the School of Business, and the
University Graduate Council. Several members indicated that they would
be pleased to receive information from the Dean prior to the Ph.D.
Program Committee voting on such a curriculum request.

The meeting was adjourned at 1:45 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted,
David Harless
Secretary