MINUTES OF THE UNIVERSITY SENATE, FEBRUARY 13, 1995


The University Senate met in regular session at 3:00 p.m., Monday February 1
3,
1995 in Room 115 of the Nursing Health Sciences Building.

Professor Raymond Cox, Chairperson of the Senate Council, presided.

Members absent were: Kevin Adams, Dan Altman, Drew Alvarez, Gary Anglin,
James Applegate*, Michael Bardo*, Paige Bendel, Mark Berger, David Berry, Thomas
Blues*, Maria Boosalis*, Jana Bowling, Dean Brothers, Allan Butterfield*, Ben
Carr, Edward Carter, Eric Christianson*, Jordan Cohen, Delwood Collins, Jean
Cooper, Virginia Davis-Nordin, Susan deCarvalho*, Robert Farquhar*, Michael
Freeman*, Daniel Fulks, Richard Furst, Lorraine Garkovich, Anne Haas, Kirby
Hancock, Issam Harik, J. John Harris, Monica Harris, S. Zafar Hasan*, Christine
Havice, Robert Hemenway, James Houghland, Robert Ireland, Jeff Jones, Richard
Kermode*, Craig Koontz, Thomas Lester, Jonathan Liar, Thomas Lillich*, C. Oran
Little, Brent Logan, Martin McMahon, M. Pinar Menguc, Karen Mingst, Donald
Mullineaux, David Nash*, Michael Neitzel, Scott Noble, Jack Olson*, Ronald Pen*,
Barbara Phillips, Rhoda-Gale Pollack, Deborah Powell, Daniel Reedy, Thomas
Robinson, Edgar Sagan, David Shipley, William Stober*, David Stockham, Phillip
Tibbs, Chris Vance, Henry Vasconez, Charles Wethington*, Carolyn Williams, Eugen
e
Williams, H. David Wilson*.

Chairman Cox stated the minutes from the October 10, 1994 meeting need to be
approved. There were no corrections to the minutes and they were approved as
circulated.

The Chair made the following announcements:

Lionel Williamson from Agriculture Economics has agreed to chair the Senate
Ad
Hoc Committee on Minorities.

The normal March meeting will be during Spring break, so the meeting has bee
n
tentatively moved to March 20, 1995. If anyone has any concerns about that,
please let the Senate Council Office know.

There are three new members to the Senate Council, they are Jan Schach from
Horticulture and Landscape Architecture, Karen Mingst from Political Science, an
d
Jacqueline Noonan from the College of Medicine. The new members were given a
round of applause.

The Rules Committee was supposed to report in February concerning replacing
the quality point deficient with GPA; they will be reporting in March.

There was an error on the Engineering ballot for University Senate; a new
ballot will be out tomorrow.


* Absence Explained
Chairman Cox recognized Professor Don Sands from the Department of Chemistry
to
present a Memorial Resolution.


Memorial Resolution
Haibin Deng
February 13, 1995

Dr. Haibin Deng, Assistant Professor of Chemistry, died of a heart
attack on December 29, 1994. He was thirty-one years old. He left his
wife, Jian Tan, and three-year-old son, Aaron Deng. Dr. Deng was a
native of China, and a graduate of Fudan University. He earned his
Ph.D. at Ohio State University in 1991, and he held postdoctoral
appointments at Cornell University from 1991 to 1994.

We became aware of Dr. Deng in the fall of 1993, when we were searching
for exceptional talent to fill a faculty vacancy in inorganic
chemistry. He joined our faculty in August, 1994.

Haibin's one semester with us was a busy one. He taught a large
section of CHE 105, where the students observed that Dr. Deng was a
very smart man who really knew the material, and he was a very nice man
who really cared about his students. Haibin took his teaching duties
seriously, and he also worked industriously to establish his research
program. At the time of his death, experiments and reactions were
underway in his laboratory, grant proposals were under consideration,
and plans were in place for an illustrious career.

Our perceptions agree with those of the students. Haibin Deng was an
excellent scientist. And he was a nice person, with a fine sense of
humor and a collegial disposition. He was at the University of
Kentucky only one semester, but we are glad and proud that at least for
that period Haibin was our colleague and our friend. It is always
painful to lose a colleague, and a friend. In this case, our sorrow is
made more intense by awareness of the promise unfilled and the
potential unrealized.

Professor Sands asked that this resolution be included in the minutes of the
meeting and that a copy be sent to Professor Deng's family.

The Chair asked that the Senate stand for a moment of silence in recognition
of Professor Deng.

Chairman Cox then recognized Professor David Mohney from the College of
Architecture to present a memorial resolution.


Memorial Resolution

David Spaeth
February 13, 1995

Professor David Spaeth passed away on Friday, January 6, 1995, at his
home on North Limestone Street in Lexington. His sons, Anthony and
Sloan, were with him. He is also survived by a sister, Mary Campbell,
of Lincoln, Nebraska. A memorial service was held on Sunday, January
8, at the home of Maury Reeves, on West Third Street in Lexington.

David Spaeth was born in the village of Zanesville, Ohio, in 1941, and
spent his early years in the midwest, traveling each summer to northern
Wisconsin to visit his maternal grandparents. Those annual travels,
first by train and later by car, introduced him to the city of Chicago,
and he would write, much later in his life, of his sense of wonder when
confronted with that large and growing city. Zanesville had served as
a jumping off point for western migration early in the nineteenth
century, but by the time David was a child there, it had long been
superseded by cities and towns further west. David would remember
Zanesville as "..an environment filled with remnants of possibilities
past, a kind of unrealized utopia, failed but interesting for the
lessons it taught..."

Chicago, on the other hand, was a city filled with possibilities of the
present for David Spaeth. Even as a child, he was fascinated by these
brief visits as he passed through the city. "There was so much to
see," he wrote much later in his life, "tall apartment and office
buildings, the lake, parks, yacht harbors, and more..." Two buildings
in particular caught his attention one summer, when he was nine, north
of the Loop and near Lake Michigan. They were so unlike anything he
had seen before that he assumed they had to have been designed by Frank
Lloyd Wright, the only architect's name he knew at that point in his
childhood. In fact they were the apartment houses at 860 and 880
Lakeshore Drive, designed by German }migr} architect Ludwig Mies van
der Rohe. If we look for a calling in the life of David Spaeth, surely
there was no clearer foreshadowing than this moment as a child he
recognized the uniqueness and quality of something he saw, and then as
an adult spent his life first studying and coming to understand that
quality, and then building upon it.

In 1959 David enrolled at the architecture school where Mies van der
Rohe served as Dean, the Illinois Institute of Technology, and over the
next seven years earned both a Bachelor of Science and a Master of
Science of Architecture. He studied with Mies, a profound and quiet
architect then at the pinnacle of his career in America. In his book
about Mies, David would write of his mentor, "It was characteristic of
Mies van der Rohe to reduce everything to its clearest and most
elemental form. While the clarity and integrity of his work attest to
this, these qualities also offer the greatest obstacles to
understanding and appreciating that work. Not only did Mies demand
that we look at the work itself, he also demanded that we look beyond
the work to its inner structure-to those ideas which reflect and
animate an age."

The clarity and integrity of David Spaeth's life and work attest both
to the lessons he learned as a student and to his ability to transform
them into his own teaching. He arrived at the University of Kentucky
in 1969, where he quickly developed a reputation as a challenging
teacher, one who refined a student's ideas so that they could
understand the consequences of what they chose to do. His reputation
among the students was a tough professor, tough but fair. No doubt
many of them approached his studio and lecture classes with
trepidation, but just as many if not more left with a new
self-knowledge about themselves.

Among the faculty, too, David demanded intellectual honesty, he liked
nothing better than a good high-brow argument. But there was an
intellectually generous side to him as well, and many colleagues would
find a paper of David's (or someone else) in their mailbox from time to
time, to be read at their leisure and discussed when the moment was
right. At the level of this institution as well, David was valued for
his clarity. Accordingly he was called upon to serve the university
where that virtue was most necessary, and he did so in a great variety
of capacities, including participation in this body, the University
Senate.

David Spaeth never forgot his responsibility to the world outside the
university. His writing and lectures were meant to engage a broad
spectrum of people about the possibilities in architecture, and he
succeeded at this. But his reputation outside Kentucky never
interfered with his pedagogy on campus. Indeed, most of his students
had little idea of how well-respected he was in the academic world of
architecture, and that was fine with him.

David's interests in his community extended well beyond the realm of
architecture. He was active throughout his life in Lexington, with
numerous civic groups, centered around preservation and neighborhood
activities in the downtown portion of the city. He carried out design
projects, primarily renovations, in this part of Lexington, and brought
his strong sensibilities about design to a new set of people in the
process. Over 200 people gathered at his memorial service, and their
diversity was remarkable: students, former students, fellow faculty,
colleagues, friends, clients, and even contractors were in attendance,
and were testimony to the range of his abilities.

Over the last two and a half decades, Professor David Spaeth was valued
across the campus, as well as within the Colleges of Architecture and
Agriculture, not only for his individual achievements, both academic
and professional, but perhaps more for his high standards of excellence
that provided a basis for his life and work. He made the virtues of
clarity and professionalism integral to everything that he did, from
his teaching to his writing to his extensive service to this
University. Perhaps the best remembrance of David Spaeth can be found
in the words of his mentor, Mies van her Rohe:

True education is concerned not only with practical goals but also with
values. By our practical aims we are bound to the specific structure
of our epoch. Our values, on the other hand, are rooted in the
spiritual nature of men. Our practical aims measure only our material
progress. The values we profess reveal the level of our culture - the
long path from the material through function to creative work has only
a single goal: to create order out of the desperate confusion of our
time.

Professor Mohney asked that the resolution be included in the minutes of the
meeting and that a copy be sent to Professor Spaeth's family.

Chairman Cox asked that the Senate stand for a moment of silence in recognit
ion
of Professor Spaeth.

The Chair recognized Professor Bradley Canon from the Political Science
Department to present a memorial resolution.


Memorial Resolution
Kenneth E. Vanlandingham
February 13, 1995

Dr. Kenneth Vanlandingham died at age 74 in January 1995. A son of
Kentucky, he was born and raised in Crittenden. He had polio as a
child, overcoming considerable physical obstacles. He received his BA
and MA degrees from the University of Kentucky, and his PhD degree in
1950 from the University of Illinois. His dissertation topic, county
financial administration in Kentucky, reflected this Kentucky heritage.

He was professor in the Political Science Department of University of
Kentucky, joining the faculty in 1950. His courses on Municipal
Government and Rural Local Government were popular, taken by many
future attorneys and public administrators around the state. Although
officially retiring in 1986, Dr. Vanlandingham never completely
retired, still proctoring two correspondence courses and communicating
with students about their written responses. In fact, he was grading
yet another set of papers in his hospital bed just weeks before his
death.

Dr. Vanlandingham wrote a number of articles and other publications
dealing with state and local government and the Kentucky constitution.
Those articles appeared in such publications as Municipal Government,
Kentucky Law Journal, William and Mary Law Review, and Northwestern
University Law Review. In the profession he wrote the book on home
rule, becoming known as the "prophet of home rule" for cities. As one
former student and city manager himself commented, ". . . he brought it
all together, explained all the vagaries, running up the necessary
storm warnings but more important, offering the keys to making the
theory work. The man was a treasure for those that believe in home
rule."

Dr. Vanlandingham used his professional expertise in the broader
community. He conducted a number of studies for the Kentucky
Legislative Research Commission and served as a member of state
committees to study problems of metropolitan government in Kentucky.
He also served as consultant to the Advisory Commission on
Intergovernmental Relations, and to the U.S. Bureau of the Census.

But most of all he was a gentle man, one who believed that institutions
at the local level best serve the community. He is survived by his
wife Joyce and their daughter and family, all of Lexington.

Professor Canon asked that the resolution be included in the minutes of the
meeting and that a copy be sent to Professor Vanlandingham's family.

Chairman Cox asked that the Senate stand for a moment of silence in
recognition of Professor Vanlandingham.

The Chair recognized the Chair-elect of the Senate, Professor Gretchen
LaGodna from Nursing, to present a resolution.


Special Resolution
Randall W. Dahl
February 13, 1995

Randall Dahl was named Registrar for the University of Kentucky in
March of 1985 and thus became Secretary to the University Senate. In
this capacity he has served us well. His has been a tireless voice in
efforts to make this a better University. He served on the Admission
and Academic Standards Committee, as well as several others, and was
the originator of many rule and procedural changes which resulted in an
improved academic atmosphere for us all -- most especially students.
He oversaw our move to greatly enhanced electronic records keeping, to
telephone registration, and to improved service for both faculty and
students.

Dr. Dahl has left UK for the University of Alabama and we will miss
him. It is appropriate that the Senate thank him for his many efforts
on our behalf and that we wish him well.

Professor LaGodna moved that this resolution be spread upon the minutes and
that
a copy be forwarded to Randall Dahl

Chairman Cox then called the Senate into executive session for the presentat
ion
of the honorary degree candidates. He stated that the information was in confid
ence
and should not be announced until the President is ready to make the information
public. He recognized Dr. Emery Wilson from the College of Medicine for the
presentation of the list of candidates. Dr. Wilson stated he was pleased to pre
sent
the recommendations of the Honorary Degree Committee. He thanked the members of
the
committee and particularly Dr. Dan Reedy for their work. Dr. Wilson read
biographical information on the four nominees for the Senate's consideration.

Chair-elect Professor Gretchen LaGodna moved that the Senate accept the
recommendations from the Honorary Degree Committee. The motion was seconded and
there was no discussion. The motion was unanimously approved for recommendation
to
the President.

Chairman Cox recognized Professor Gretchen LaGodna, Chair-Elect of the Senat
e
Council, for the first action item. Professor LaGodna stated that the first ite
m
was a proposal to change the name of the Department of Agricultural Engineering
to
the Department of Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering. This proposal reflec
ts
the changes in the field of Agricultural Engineering. Chairman Cox stated the
proposal came from the Senate Council and needed no second.

There was no discussion. In a voice vote, the proposal unanimously passed a
nd
reads as follows:

Proposal:
Change the name of the Department of Agricultural Engineering to the
Department of Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering.

Rationale:
In addition to the traditional areas of emphasis, modern agricultural
engineering includes such areas as food and bioprocess engineering and
bioenvironmental engineering. This has led the field of agricultural
engineering into greater emphasis on basic biology and biological
systems in its instructional, research and extension programs. The
proposal reflects these changes and has the approval of both the Senate
Committee on Academic Organization and Structure and the Senate Council.

If approved, the proposal will be forwarded to the administration for
appropriate action.

Chairman Cox recognized Professor LaGodna for the second action item. Profe
ssor
LaGodna stated the second item was another name change proposal, i.e. to change
the
name of the Department of Special Education to the Department of Special Educati
on
and Rehabilitation Counseling. The Chair said the item required no second.

There was no discussion, the item passed unanimously in a voice vote and rea
ds
as follows:

Proposal:
Change the name of the Department of Special Education to the
Department of Special Education and Rehabilitation Counseling.

Rationale:
In the College of Education the program of Rehabilitation Counseling
has been affiliated with the Department of Special Education, and this
proposal simply reflects this administrative change. The proposal has
the approval of both the Senate Committee on Academic Organization and
Structure and the Senate Council.

If approved, the proposal will be forwarded to the administration for
appropriate action.

Chairman Cox recognized Chair-elect LaGodna for Action Item C. Professor
LaGodna stated C was a proposal to change the 1995 5th year calendar for the
baccalaureate students in the College of Pharmacy. The change would mean that t
he
semester began January 3, 1995 and ended Friday, April 21, 1995. The rationale
has
to do with the particular course work that these students take during the fifth
year
and the need to coordinate that with the rotations of the other health care team
with whom they work.

There was no discussion and the item passed unanimously in a voice vote. Th
e
items reads as follows:

Proposal:
To Change the 1995 5th year calendar for B.S. students in the College of
Pharmacy to begin Tuesday, January 3 and end Friday, April 21.

Rationale:
For the past four years Pharmacy has sought Senate approval to change
the calendar for the B.S. Students because of complications with their
Clerkship courses. Spring semester B.S. students only enroll in two
experiential courses. An integral part of the experience involves
rotating in patient care areas, where the teams change on a monthly
basis, on the calendar. In order to have the students start and stop
with the other teams, it is necessary to begin the semester immediately
after the new year with student rotations scheduled on a monthly basis.
Spring break is scheduled at the end of the semester.

The proposal is supported by the University Senate Council.

Chairman Cox recognized Chair-elect LaGodna for item D. Professor LaGodna s
aid
that item D was a proposal to merger the Department of Materials Science and
Engineering and the Department of Chemical Engineering into a new department ent
itle
Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering. The purpose of the proposal i
s to
maximum the academic resources of both the departments.

There was no discussion and the item passed in an unanimous voice vote. The
item reads as follows:

Proposal:
To merge the Department of Materials Science and Engineering and the Departm
ent
of Chemical Engineering into a new Department of Chemical and Materials
Engineering.

Rationale:
The Chemical and Materials Engineering faculty sees some long-term advantage
s to
the merger, specifically, the opportunity to build critical masses of
researchers in several areas such as polymers/composites, carbon materials,
ceramics, microelectronics/thing films,
biomaterials/biomedical/biopharmaceutical engineering, and others areas wher
e
the department has the appropriate skills to address technology needs. Thes
e
critical masses may be within the new department, with other units in the
College of Engineering, with other centers, departments and programs at the
University of Kentucky, or with units outside the University. Coordinated
program planning can allow both curricula to improve with the efficient use
of
our resources.

The proposal is recommended by the Senate Committee on Academic Organization
and
Structure and the University Senate Council.

If approved, the proposal will be forwarded to the administration for
appropriate action.

Chairman Cox recognized Professor LaGodna for item E. Professor LaGodna sai
d
the proposal was to dissolve the Department of Vocational Education in the Colle
ge
of Education. Faculty assignments have been moved to other departments; therefo
re,
the department has no faculty and needs to be abolished.

There was no discussion; the item passed in voice vote and reads as follows:

Proposal:
To dissolve the Department of Vocational Education, College of
Education.

Rationale:
On October 6, 1994, the Board of Trustees approved the move of the
faculty in this program into units in the College of Agriculture (two
persons) and College of Human Environmental Sciences (one person) and
one person reassigned in the College of Education. Now the department
in Education must be formally abolished. This proposal has the
approval of the University Senate Council.

If approved, the proposal will be forwarded to the administration for
appropriate action.

Chairman Cox recognized Professor LaGodna for item F. Professor LaGodna sta
ted
F was a proposal to change the University Senate Rules, Section IV, dealing with
admission criteria to the College of Nursing. The change is basically to add a
particular criterion to apply to all students. The students must complete a wri
tten
statement describing reasons for pursuing Nursing as a career. This statement w
ill
be required of all applying students.

Professor Lee Meyer (Agriculture) asked if the statement would be evaluated
according to particular criteria or is any written statement acceptable. Profes
sor
LaGodna said there would be criteria established by which the statements would b
e
evaluated.

The item passed in an unanimous voice vote and reads as follows:

Proposal: (add underlined portions, delete bracketed portions)

4.2.2.1 Admission to College of Nursing: (US:4/12/82; US:3/10/86;
US:10/14/91)
The College of Nursing enrollment will be composed of
four-year students, associate degree nursing graduates and
diploma nursing school graduates. Admission to the University
does not guarantee admission to the College of Nursing.
Preference will be given to Kentucky residents.

Applicants must be in a state of good health enabling them to
carry out the functions of the professional nurse. Routinely,
each student will be required to obtain a rubella and rubeola
titers, and have an annual tuberculin test or chest ray.

Progression to upper division courses is regulated so that the
total number of full time equivalents at the beginning of the
junior year does not exceed 120. Admission criteria for five
types of students are presented below:

1. A freshman student will be [admitted] eligible for admission to
the College of Nursing (CON) if the student has a high school
grade point average (GPA) of 2.50 or above on a scale of 4.0,
and also meets the criteria for automatic admission to the
University of Kentucky, and completes a written statement
describing reasons for pursuing nursing as a career. (Specific
criteria available in Student Services, College of Nursing.)

2. A transfer student who is not a registered nurse will be
[admitted] eligible for admission to the CON after meeting the
following requirements:

a.
Applicants with less than 24 credit hours must meet the
criteria for entering
freshman and have at least a GPA of 2.35 on all college work
attempted
as computed by the Office of Admissions.

b.
Applicants with 24 credit hours or more must have at least a
GPA of 2.35
on all college work attempted as computed by the Office of
Admissions.

c.
All transfer applicants complete a written statement
describing reasons for
pursuing Nursing as a career. (Specific criteria available
in Student Services,
College of Nursing.)

************

Background and Rationale:
Over the past three years Nursing has been unable to admit all of
the qualified applicants. As a mechanism for selecting those most
likely to do well in Nursing and be successful and persistent in a
Nursing career, the College proposes to add to the admission
requirements the submission of a written statement describing
reasons for pursuing Nursing as a career. This proposal is
supported by both the Admissions and Academic Standards Committee
and the Senate Council.

Implementation: Fall, 1995

Note: If approved, the proposal will be forwarded to the Rules
Committee for Codification.

Chairman Cox recognized Professor LaGodna for item G. Professor LaGodna sta
ted
item G was a proposal to add to the University Senate Rules, Section V, Graduati
on
Requirements. The proposal is to add the Inference Requirement that was on the
circulated materials in the same sense that the Writing Requirement is now a
separate and additional graduation requirement. This does not alter the place o
f
the Inference Requirement in University Studies but pulls it out and makes it
separate.

Professor Louis Swift (Dean Undergraduate Studies) explained that this is a
technical change which came about as a result of a long discussion which has gon
e on
across the Commonwealth sponsored by the Council on Higher Education to share
general education requirements across the state. An agreement was proposed that
under certain conditions students who satisfy the general education requirements
at
one institution will satisfy the general education requirements at another
institution. There are differences in these general education programs, and whe
n
the proposal, which was hammered out over the course of a year, came to our Sena
te
Council, they thought we should make sure that all of our students have the Fore
ign
Language requirement and the Inference requirement. The Senate Council endorsed
the
proposal only under those conditions. In the CHE proposal the Foreign Language
requirement was made an exception; thus foreign language is not a problem. All
transfer students who come to the University without a foreign language will hav
e to
have a foreign language before they leave the Institution with a degree.

The Senate Council recommendation under discussion places the Inference requirem
ent
in the same category as the Writing Requirement, i.e. makes it also a graduation
requirement for all students. It changes absolutely nothing regarding the stude
nts
who come here as freshmen and graduate; substantially it changes nothing regardi
ng
transfer students. Currently both transfer students and native students have to
fulfill the Inference requirement. Technically, by making the Inference require
ment
a graduation requirement as well as part of USP, we assure that all students,
whether they are transfer students or native students will satisfy the Inference
requirement before they get a degree. This is a technical change which really d
oes
not alter anything currently in practice at the University; it gives us a catego
ry
under which to obligate transfer students to take the Inference Requirement if t
hey
come to the Institution without having taken it in their general education progr
am
elsewhere.

Greg Watkins (Student Representative - Business and Economics) asked if a
transfer student was defined as a student from another university and a communit
y
college.

Dr. Swift indicated the transfer students being dealt with are from all the
public institutions in Kentucky, including the Community Colleges. If the stude
nts
take USP courses in the Community College system they satisfy the requirement
automatically. A Community College student is a UK student.

There was no further discussion, the proposal passed in a unanimous voice vo
te
and reads as follows:

Proposal: (Add to Section V, Graduation Requirements, the following)

Inference Requirement:
Each baccalaureate student must satisfy one of the following:

(1) Any calculus course
or
(2) STA 200, Statistics, A Force in Human Judgment plus PHI 120,
Introductory Logic of PHI 320, Symbolic Logic I

or the equivalent of one of the above.

Rationale:
The effect of this action is to place the Inference Requirement (like
the Writing Requirement) in the category of a graduation requirement as
well as in the University Studies Program. The result will be that
native students will satisfy this requirement through the regular path
of University Studies; transfer students who come to the University
without having fulfilled this requirement must do so prior to
graduation.

Implementation Date: Fall Semester, 1995

Note: If approved, the proposal will be forwarded to the Rules
Committee for codification.

Chairman Cox recognized Professor LaGodna for action item H. Professor LaGo
dna
stated this was a proposal to change the University Senate Rules - Section VI,
concerning Honor Codes. Currently there are three colleges within the Universit
y
that have established Honor Codes that were approved by the University Senate.
The
purpose of this addition to the Honor Code part of the rules is to insure that t
here
is a consistent and equal due process that is afforded students whose offenses m
ay
be dealt with under an Honor Code versus students whose offenses may be dealt wi
th
under usual University Senate Rules. This addition says that all students wheth
er
or not they are in a college with an Honor Code have the right of appeal through
the
Academic Ombud Office.

Chairman Cox stated there was one editorial correction. On the third line o
f
the second page the word "dismissal" should be underlined.

Professor Douglas Michael (Law) asked why there is not a provision permittin
g
the remanding of the case to the college academic honor council or committee, so
that if the student's rights have been substantially violated, they might be
corrected that way.

Chairman Cox stated that the Senate Council conferred with Professor Bill
Fortune on this item. The Council's view was that it was better not to do that.

Professor Tom Garrity (Medicine) stated he was from a College that has an Ho
nor
Council and Honor Code, and in their discussion there was some question as to
whether or not they could expect that the case being sent back to the original b
ody
would have a fair and unbiased hearing the second time around. Their thought wa
s if
the student appealed from the Honor Council, it might be taken by members of the
Honor Council to be like a slap in the face. If the appeal ended up before the
same
Honor Council, a fair and impartial hearing might be more difficult to obtain.

There was no further discussion and the proposal passed in an unanimous voic
e
vote. The Proposal reads as follows:

Proposal:[add underlined sections; delete bracketed portions]

6.6.0HONOR CODE
Any school or college may establish, with the approval of the
Senate, an Honor Code or comparable system governed by the
students with approval by [and/or appeal to] the faculty of such
a college. When such an Honor Code or comparable system has been
established, the procedures for disposition of cases of academic
offenses described above shall not apply to the extent that the
offenses are subject to the Honor Code and committed by a student
subject to the Code.

A student found guilty of committing an offense subject to an
Honor Code may appeal that finding through the Academic Ombud to
the Appeals Board. The Appeals Board, however, shall not
normally sit as a de novo fact finding body, but shall limit its
review to ensuring that the college's academic honors board or
committee adequately followed its own written procedures in
determining guilt or innocence and that the finding of guilt is
supported by the preponderance of evidence.

However, if the Board, by the majority of those present, believes
the student's rights under the University Senate Rules and the
applicable rules of the academic unit governing academic
relationships have been substantially violated, the Board may
conduct a de novo hearing on the issue of guilt.

If the Board, by majority of those present, believes the findings
or determination of the Honors Council are not supported by the
preponderance of the evidence, the Board may reverse the finding
of guilt and there shall be no further proceedings in the case.

College academic honor councils or committees shall maintain a
verbatim record of their proceedings to ensure that the Appeals
Board is able to perform this function.

The punishment meted out to a student governed by such a system
shall be as designated thereby except that actual suspension,
dismissal, or expulsion shall be imposed only with the
recommendation of the dean of the college and upon approval by
the President of the University.

Rationale:
The purpose of this proposal is to make explicit a student's appeal
rights of an honor code violation and to give guidance to the Appeals
Boards as to how it may handle such appeals. In essence this gives a
student found guilty of an honor code violation the same appeal rights
as students found guilty of an academic offense in a college without an
honor code. This proposal is submitted and endorsed by the Senate
Council.

Implementation Date: Fall, 1995

Note:If approved, the proposal will be forwarded to the Rules Committee
for codification.

The meeting was adjourned by Chairman Cox at 3:55 p.m.





Louis J. Swift
Acting Registrar