xt75mk65768t https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt75mk65768t/data/mets.xml University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate Kentucky University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate 1983-02-14 minutes 2004ua061 English Property rights reside with the University of Kentucky. The University of Kentucky holds the copyright for materials created in the course of business by University of Kentucky employees. Copyright for all other materials has not been assigned to the University of Kentucky. For information about permission to reproduce or publish, please contact the Special Collections Research Center. University of Kentucky. University Senate (Faculty Senate) records Minutes (Records) Universities and colleges -- Faculty University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, February 14, 1983 text University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, February 14, 1983 1983 1983-02-14 2020 true xt75mk65768t section xt75mk65768t LHMVERSHY OF KENTUCKY WCMK
LEXINGTON. KENTUCKY 40506-0032 'Lg‘r‘dv V
' (,{vk KL?"
i . A
.‘f r. -t
" ‘L‘V. I: 3 II: JILL
UNIVERSITY SENATE COUNCIL
10 ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
January 31, 1983
u \( ~ .
rI ( v11; f 3 33‘ 162/
n w I, 29‘ , \
TO: Members, University Senate IT:,
2‘ (1 -~“‘ ‘
.« >~,c( V
The University Senate will meet in regular session on Monday,
February 14, 1983 at 3:00 p.m. in the Classroom Building, room 106.
Minutes of December 13,1982.
Memorial Resolution.
Resolution on Robinson Forest (circulated under date of
January 28,1983). ’
Honorary Degrees . @‘I
xvgx
Chemistry Department appeal on ruling by the Senate Rules
Committee relative to missed examinations (circulated under
date of January 17, 1983).
Proposed change in University Senate Rules, Section V,
3.1.1 pursuant to the repeat option for undergraduate stu—
dents. (Circulated under date of January 13, 1983.)
Selective Admissions at the University of Kentucky, FOR
DISCUSSION ONLY. (Circulated under date of January 28,
1983.)
Other.
Elbert W. Ockerman
Secretary
/cet
Note: If you are unable to attend this meetino 0, please contact Ms.
Martha Ferguson in the Registrar's office (7- 7155).
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY UNIVERSITY
MINUTES OF THE UNIVERSITY SENATE, FEBRUARY l4, T983
The University Senate met in regular session at 3:00 p.m., Monday, February l4,
l983, in Room l06 of the Classroom Building.
Donald W. Ivey, presided
Members absent: Robert B. Anderson*, Michael Baer*, Charles Barnhart, Trudi
Bellardo*, William H. Blackburn, Jack C. Blanton, James A. Boling*, Peter Bcsomworth*,
Connie A. Bridge, James Buckholtz, Joseph T. Burch, David Chalk*, Donald B. Clapp,
D. Kay Clawson*, Andy Coiner, Glenn B. Collins*, Gary L. Cromwell, David E. Denton,
Richard C. Domek*, Joseph M. Dougherty, Herbert N. Drennon, Jeff Dwellen*, Nancy E. Dye,
Anthony Eardley, Donald T. Frazier, Michael Freeman, Tim Freudenberg, Richard W.
Furst, Art Gallaher, Jr., Thomas C. Gray*, Anne T. Hahn. Joseph Hamburg, S. Zafar
Hasan*, Lenda Hisle*, Michael Hislope*, Raymond R. Hornback, La Vonne Jaeger*, Peri
Jean Kennedy*, Robert G. Lawson*, Bruce A. Lucas, Paul Mandelstam*, Marion E. McKenna*,
John M. Mitchell, Nancy Mohon*, Nick Mudd*, Harold Nally*, Pamela Nickless, Robert C.
Nobel*, Clayton 0mvig*, Merrill W. Packer*, Bobby C. Pass*, Valerie Pellegrini, Bryan
Peters*, David J. Prior, Ira Ross*, Thomas Roszman, Caryl E. Rusbult*, Thomas A. Rush,
Charles Sachatello*, Ed Sagan, Timothy W. Sineath*, Otis A. Singletary*, Harry A. Smith,
John T. Smith, David A. Spaeth, Joseph V. Swintosky*, John Thompson*, Lee T. Todd*,
Marc J. Wallace, Terry Warren*, Charles Wethington, Alfred D. Winer
The Minutes of the Meeting of December l3, l982, were approved as circulated.
Chairman Ivey recognized Professor A. J. Hiatt who presented the following
Memorial Resolution on the death of Professor William Survant.
MEMORIAL RESOLUTION
William Gregory Survant l907—l982
William G. Survant, Emeritus Professor of Agronomy and
Ombudsman for the College of Agriculture at the University
of Kentucky, died at Central Baptist Hospital in Lexington
on December 20, l982. He is survived by his wife, Rubye
Bellamy Survant; a niece, Joyce S. Taylor; and a nephew,
John David Survant.
Born in Daviess County, Kentucky, August 26, l907, he
received the 8.8. and M.S. degrees from the University of
Kentucky in l93l and l945 and the Ph D. degree from Ohio
State University in l95l. He began his teaching career as
a vocational agriculture teacher in Daviess County in l93l
and later worked as a Soil Conservationist with the USDA
Scil Conservation Service and as an Extension Soil Conser-
vationist with the University of Kentucky Cooperative Ex—
tension Service. In l947, he began a rewarding career as
a teacher in the Department of Agronomy that ended with
his retirement in l974. He served as Acting Associate
Dean of Instruction in the College of Agriculture from
l966 through l968 and as Acting Chairman of the Department
of Forestry in l969—70. He was a member of the University
*Absence explained
-2-
Senate, served two terms on the Undergraduate Council, and
provided leadership and service on numerous committees of
the College of Agriculture and Department of Agronomy.
Through his teaching and advising, he had a lasting
influence on a large number of students in the College
of Agriculture. He was proud of his philosophy, skills, and
accomplishments as a teacher and took great pride in the
accomplishments of his students. ”He was an extraordinarily
good teacher...he devoted his life to his students and his
classroom,” Dean Charles Barnhart said of him. In l97l, a
former student and advisee of Survant's wrote in a letter to
him, ”You are to be commended for the outstanding job that
you do working with students. Rare today is the man who
gives unselfishly of his time and talents so that students
may progress.” In recognition of his outstanding teaching,
he received the Great Teacher Award from the U.K. Alumni
Association, Master Teacher Award from Gamma Sigma Delta,
Outstanding Professor Award from Alpha Zeta, and the Out—
standing Professor in Agronomy Award from the Agronomy Club.
After his retirement from teaching, his presence con—
tinued to be felt in the College of Agriculture through his
work as Ombudsman for Agriculture, a position he held at the
time of his death. His daily presence, his jovial give—and-
take with faculty and his good—natured verbal exchanges with
secretaries in the offices and students in the hallways kept
him an integral part of the College during his retirement
years. He will be missed sorely but remembered fondly.
Mr. Chairman, I request that this be entered into the
minutes of the University Senate and a copy sent to Mrs.
Rubye Survant.
(Prepared by Professor Wilbur Frye, Department of Agronomy, College of Agriculture)
Chairman Ivey directed that the Resolution be made a part of these minutes and
that copies be sent to the family. The senators were asked to stand for a moment of
silence in tribute and respect to Professor William Gregory Survant.
Chairman Ivey presented a resolution on Robinson Forest which had been circulated
to the Senate on January 28, l983. The motion to recommend the resolution to the
Administration for action passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION
It is the position of the Senate of the University of
Kentucky that the management and goals of the Robinson
Forest remain focused upon those programs and activities
needed to carry on the University's mission of teaching,
research and service. An emphasis on making the pro—
grams at Robinson Forest self—sufficient and/or profit
oriented will degrade the academic integrity of those
programs.
-3-
Moreover, the operations and management of the Forest
should be principally in the hands of the Department
of Forestry and the College of Agriculture and all de—
cisions should be made primarily on the basis of
instructional and research goals rather than those of
profit or revenue.
Further, the University Senate directs that its opinion
be conveyed to the President of the University for
transmission to the Board of Trustees.
Chairman Ivey recognized Professor Malcolm Jewell for the presentation of the
honorary degree candidates as recommended by the Graduate School. Professor Jewell
asked that the names be kept confidential because the awarding came from the Board
of Trustees. Following Professor Jewell's presentation, the Senators voted unani-
mously to accept the candidates for recommendation to the President.
The first action item on the agenda was the Chemistry Department's appeal on the
ruling of the Senate Rules Committee which had been circulated on January l7, l983.
Motion was made and seconded to accept the Chemistry Department's recommendation. The
Chair reminded the Senate the original rule was that departments electing to give
exams, other than final exams, in a course to all sections of the course at a common
time shall be required to do the following: list the day of the week and the time in
which the exam is to be given in the offical Schedule 9f_Classes; provide an opportuni-
ty for the students missing such an examination with a valid excuse to make up the
missed work. He said that was the item under protest. The floor was opened for dis-
cu5510n.
Chairman Ivey recognized Professor Plucknett who had asked to speak because he
felt it was very important to the Chemistry Department. Professor Plucknett hoped he
could convince the Senate that the department's interpretation of the rUles met the
letter of the rule and the spirit as well. He said it was of paramount importance
that evaluation of students be fair and nondiscriminatory, and it must also include no
compromising. The interpretation which the Chemistry Department wanted approved was:
”For purposes of this rule a student is not considered to have missed an examination
if the examination was given under an announced policy in which the results of that
examination could have been discarded." Professor Plucknett said the department's
interpretation was that a student was not missing an exam until he/she had less than
two or three exams to average. He urged the Senators to support the appeal.
Professor Canon, Chairman of the Rules Committee, had sympathy for the Chemistry
Department's position and he felt to a large extent many students were benefiting.
However, the function of the Rules Committee was to interpret the Rules in that ”Depart-
ments...electing to give exams at a common time shall be required to do the following:...
2. Provide an apportunity for students missing such exams with a valid excuse to make
up the missed work." This means that the Chemistry Department (or any other department
with a similar policy) must give a make-up exam or develop some other arrangement for
such students to gain credit as if they had taken the exam. He felt the Rules Committee
had no choice except to interpret the rule as it was written. He felt Professor
Plucknett was asking that the rule be altered rather than interpreted.
Student Senator Yeh said that students who were taking chemistry had been told
that if the appeal were denied not only would there not be a dropped exam but that to
make up a missed exam, there would be a comprehensive mini—final each semester. He felt
the Senate should not only be looking at what the Chemistry Department should be doing
_4_
with respect to the rule, but the discussion should focus on whether or not what they
were proposing was something that fits into the philosophy of not giving an arbitrary
penalty in the face of valid excuses.
Professor Bostrom felt the Senate should go along with the University Senate Rule
whether a department liked it or not. He knew there was a little trouble when a stu-
dent wanted to make up work when the student had missed legitimately. He wanted to
vote against the proposal. Student Senator Yeh said the Chemistry Department had
asked their students to talk to Student Government representatives and asked what the
outcome would be in the event the appeal was denied. Basically there would be he
dropped tests and if an exam were missed, rather than having a simple make up for each
test there would be a comprehensive test which would be used for the missed exam.
Professor Smith said that students were to be told at the beginning of a class how they
were going to be graded. He said his impression and that of his colleagues was that
when the Senate passed the rule in September the procedure which the Chemistry Depart-
ment had been using was consistent with the rule. He said when he gave grades he
tried to give them in a fair and just manner. He felt the question was to find a
mechanism which was fair, just, equitable and convenient to administer. He urged the
,Senate to support the appeal.
Dr. Wagner wanted to know if the appeal applied only to common exams and the
Chairman said that it did. The rule was: ”Departments . . . electing to give exams
at a common time shall be required to do the following: . . . 2. Provide an oppor—
tunity for students missing such exams with a valid excuse to make up the missed work.”
The question was asked if a student took all exams except one but for a valid
reason missed the last exam yet wanted to make it up and drop one of the first three,
could that be done under the Chemistry Department's present ruling? Professor Plucknett
said the student could drop only the last one if that was missed since there would be
no make—up for it. He said the Department was not asking for a waiver of the rule. The
Chairman said that Professor Canon was talking about interpretation of the rule, not
a waiver of the rule. Professor Rea said that although the current question did deal
with the common exam it was a part of a larger issue of excused absences and other tests.
He hoped whatever the interpretation was that the implications for other patterns
would be considered.
Professor Leon made a motion concerning Rule 2 which states:
"Provide an opportunity for students missing such exams
with a valid excuse to make up the missed work.”
to be amended to add the statement:
”in a manner consistent with the department's policy
for making up missed work in regular day classes.”
The Chair ruled the motion out of order, because the discussion was not changing
a rule but was concerned with the interpretation of an existing rule. The Chair told
Professor Leon if he wanted to have the Admissions and Academic Standards Committee to
consider the rule to send a suggestion to him and he would forward it to the Committee.
He said they were not accepting changes in the rule.
Professor Krislov moved the previous question which was seconded and passed.
In a hand count the vote was 64 to support the Rules Committee's interpretation and
35 in support of the Chemistry Department‘s interpretation.
-5-
Chairman Ivey recognized Professor Douglas Rees. Professor Rees, on behalf of
the University Senate Council, recommended approval of the proposed change in the
University Senate Rules, Section V, 3.l.l pursuant to the repeat option for under—
graduate students. The proposal was circulated under date of January l3, l983.
Professor Rees added that some students have been abusing the repeat option. There
are cases in which students have been encouraged to take the course and then apply
for the repeat option after the grade has been given rather than to follow the spirit
of the rule to apply in writing early in the semester.
. The floor was opened for questions and discussion. Professor Rea moved an amend—
ment to delete the first paragraph and the words ”which have been completed with a
grade of C, D, or E” in the second papragrph of the rule. Professor Rea felt that
students who had a B should also be able to repeat the course. The amendment was
seconded. Professor Canon had no great objection to Professor Rea’s amendment, but
felt it should be considered by the appropriate committee. He said it was not germane
to the amendment of the rule which was on the floor. He wanted to see the amendment
withdrawn.
Student Senator Yeh moved that the amendment be sent back to the Senate Council
for committee action. The motion was seconded and passed. Professor Rea asked if that
didn't mean that somebody had to do something and bring it back to the Senate and the
Chairman said that it did. ,
The rule was passed unanimously and the relevant portion reads as follows addition
to old rule is underlined :
A student exercising the repeat option must notify in writing the
dean of the college in which he is enrolled, and his advisor no
later than the last day for dropping the course without a grade
of any kind appearing on the transcript. (This is three weeks
following the first day of classes in regular semesters.)
The final item on the agenda was for discussion only and concerned the report
from the Committee on Admissions and Academic Standards regarding selective admissions.
Professor Ivey said that written amendments and changes would be accepted by the
Senate Council up to March 8 at which time he would circulate the material to the Senate
in order to have some basis for action in March. The Chairman recognized Professor
Robert Altenkirch, Chairman of the Committee, who presented the information from the docu—
ments which had been circulated on January 28, l983. He said that the document was
reworked from the previous document and the committee tried to come up with something
realistic and workable. The proposal was that there would be three applicant cate—
gories: automatic acceptance, automatic rejection, and a rank-ordered pool. He said
that EGPA was earned grade point average and PGPA was predicted grade point average.
The basis for automatic acceptance would be a PGPA of 2.0 for the freshman year
based upon a sliding scale of ACT score and HSGPA, the scale to be derived from the
record of achievement of actual past freshmen at U.K. The basis for automatic rejection
would be the achievement of neither a 2.0 HSGPA nor an ACT score of ll. Students falling
between automatic acceptance and automatic rejection would be placed in a pool to be
rank-ordered in reference to diversity (geographical, ethnic, etc.), personal achieve-
ment outside the classroom and academic standing. Students to be accepted from the
pool Would constitute no more than 20% of the entering freshman class. Foreign students
would need a TOEFL score of at least 525. Athletes would be admitted according to
~6-
NCAA and SEC entrance standards in order to keep our athletic programs competitive
with other similar universities.
An Admissions Committee, appointed by Chancellor Gallaher and comprised largely
of faculty, would be available for purposes of appeal and exceptions not covered under
the terms of the proposed policy given above.
The Chairman thanked Professor Altenkirch for his helpful information. The floor
was opened for questions and discussion. Professor Rea said he noticed in the academic
part of the rank order formula there was a spread of lOO points with a rather precipi—
tous drop rather than a scaling so that if a person were in the upper quarter there
would be lOO points and if in the next quarter that student would get only 50 points.
Professor Altenkirch mentioned that would be all persons with l.99 or below standing.
“The University is not married to those figures, but the committee would like to see
the framework being used,” he said. A senator asked for the University's definition
of a student athlete. Professor Altenkirch said if the athlete were automatically
acceptable, the committee would not be concerned anyway. If he were not automatically
acceptable, the Athletic Department would have to come to the Admissions Office and
certify him/her as a student athlete. That group would be constituted of scholarship
applicants. Dean Ockerman said about 95% of them are people who have been awarded
athletic grants-in—aid. There is another category called walk-ons. The Athletic De—
partment will have to identify for the Admissions Office those people that are bona fide
walk—on candidates before they will be included in the student athletic pool. A senator
wanted to know if the university had criteria to describe what a student athlete was.
Professor Altenkirch said a scholarship walk-on athlete was one that participates in the
athletic program. He said that the point on student athletes was not unanimous, and it
was only fair to allow the different opinions to be presented to the Senate.
Professor Marsden said he was troubled by the separate rule for student athletes
for several reasons. Part of his reasons were philosophical and part were realistic.
We are a State University and cannot have one set of rules for one group and a second
set for a different group," he added. The focus for the selective admissions policy
was essentially to select students who would be successful on this campus. He urged
that all students be treated equally and not have separate rules for special persons.
The Chairman asked that the information be put in writing and sent to the Senate Council
Office.
Professor Altenkirch said there were already separate standards and if not, there
would not be the rank ordered pool. Professor Smith wanted to know if all student
athletes would go into the pool or only those who didn't get an automatic acceptance.
Professor Altenkirch said that if a student were automatically acceptable, athletes or
not, he/she would not be placed in the pool.
A question was asked about the veterans and the handicapped students in the rank
order scale. Professor Altenkirch said the recommendation by the Board of Trustees
was to use data obtained from the ACT and that information on whether or not a student
was handicapped is not on the ACT. Veterans not automatically accepted may appeal,
with other applicants, to the Admissions Committee.
Chairman Ivey said that when a rejection letter went out, the plan was to send
along with it a notice saying, “If you want to discuss or appeal your situation, apply
to the Admissions Committee.” The committee's job would be to make exceptions to the
exceptions.
Professor Heil asked if the committee would be worried that students would start
marking off a lot of check marks thinking it was to their advantage? Professor
-7-
Altenkirch said the questions were not questions such as, ”Here you in the high school
band?” He said there were multiple questions addressed to each issue. Based on the
pattern of those questions, extra—curricular achievement is evaluated.
A senator asked if data had been produced on how entering foreign students did
with TOEFL scores less than 550. Professor Altenkirch said he had the data for the
Fall l982. There were eleven first—time foreign students. None of them had a TOEFL
score less than 550. There was only one student whose entrance was based on his
TOEFL score which was greater than 550. Professor Altenkirch said that when selec—
tive admissions was instituted, there should be a realistic policy. Dean Ockerman
said in what he had seen around the country the University‘s system was fairer.
For example, University of Maryland is going to selective admissions in T984, and
they are setting an ACT or SAT cut—off score. They will eliminate a large number of
black students. “Under the rank order system here I am hopeful we can maintain or
increase the number of minority students.”
Professor Ivey said the Admissions Committee would be responsible for a lot of
the decisions and the reason the cut—off date was so early was so that applications
can be tracked. If it looked as though there would be an enrollment problem, the
percentage could be changed.
Dean Conger wanted to know if there would be ranking on the pre—college curri-
culum. Professor Altenkirch said that pre—college curriculum would not come into
place until l987. The selective admissions calendars applied only to first-time
freshmen.
Chairman Ivey said the Council on Higher Education has said that every institu—
tion except the Community Colleges can make a twenty percent exception based on college
prep deficiencies. That twenty percent need not be considered as part of our exceptions
pool. Dean Conger asked about the non—degree student status. Professor Altenkirch
said the policy did not speak to the non—degree student.
Professor Thrailkill asked about changing the high school science requirements
to make them more specific. Professor Altenkirch said that was the original proposal
from the Council on Higher Education.
Professor Hilson. representing the faculty and administrators on the International
Student Committee, said that the Senators would be getting something in the mail and
asked them to read it carefully. She felt that to use TOEFL as the only criterion was
not appropriate and that it was important for other criteria to be spelled out.
The next meeting of the Senate will be March 2l, l983.
The revised calendars for l983—84 and the proposed l985-86 calendars are being
circulated for your information.
The meeting adjourned at 5:00 p.m.
Elbert w. Ockerman
Secretary
1983
June 1
June 15
Ju1y 23
August 1
August 3
August 22
August 23
August 23
August 24
August 24—30
August 30
August 30
September 5
September 7
September 7
September 14
September 14
September 16
September 22
October 15
October 17
October 17
October 24
November 4
November 7—16
November 13
November 17
UNIVERSITY CALENDAR
1983 Fa11 Semester
Wednesday — Dead1ine for app1ying for admission or readmission
for the 1983 Fa11 Semester for a11 categories of undergraduate app1icants
wishing to be inc1uded in the Summer Advising Conferences
Wednesday - Ear1iest date to submit app1ications for regu1ar and Ear1y
Decisions Program admission, Co11ege of Medicine, for Fa11 1984
Saturday — Dead1ine for app1ying for admission or readmission to the
Graduate Sch001 for the Fa11 Semester 1983
Monday - Dead1ine for app1ications for Ear1y Decision Program, Co11ege
of Medicine, for Fa11 1984
Wednesday — Last day advance registered students may pay $50 to confirm
their Fa11 registration
Monday - Registration for new students who have not advance registered
Tuesday - Centra1ized add/drop for advance registered students
Tuesday — Last day a student may officia11y drop a course or cance1
registration with the Registrar for a fu11 refund of fees
Wednesday - C1ass work begins
Wednesday through Tuesday - Late registration for returning students who
did not advance register and new app1icants c1eared 1ate for admission.
A $20 1ate fee is assessed students who register 1ate.
Tuesday - Last day to enter an organized c1ass for the Fa11 Semester
Tuesday — Last day to officia11y withdraw from the University and receive
an 80% refund
Monday — Labor Day — Academic Ho1iday
Wednesday — Last day for payment of registration fees and/or housing and
dining fees in order to avoid cance11ation of registration and/or mea1 card
Wednesday Last day for new students to pick up ID cards from Photo-
graphic Services in order to avoid rep1acement fee
Wednesday Last day to change grading option(pass/fai1 to 1etter grade
or 1etter grade to pass/fai1; credit to audit or audit to credit)
Wednesday Last day to drop a course without it appearing on the stu—
dent' s transcript
Friday Last day for reinstatement of students cance11ed for nonpayment
of registration fees and/or housing and dining fees. Requires payment
of fees p1us $50 reinstatement fee.
Thursday — Last day for fi1ing an app1ication in co11ege dean's office
for a December degree
Saturday - Dead1ine for app1ying for admission or readmission for 1984
Spring Semester for a11 categories of undergraduate app1icants wishing
to be inc1uded in the November Advising Conferences for the Spring
Semester
Monday - Last day to drop a course
Monday — Last day to withdraw from the University or reduce course
schedu1e and receive any refund
Monday Last day to pay thesis/dissertation fees in Student Bi11ing
Services Office for a December degree
Friday — 1984 Spring Semester Advising Conference for new and readmitted
undergraduate students
Monday through Wednesday — Advance registration for the 1984 Spring
Semester
Sunday — Dead1ine for app1ications, Co11ege of Medicine, for Fa11 1984
Thursday — Last day to schedu1e a fina1 examination in the Graduate
Sch001 for candidates for a December degree 1983
November 24—26 Thursday through Saturday - Thanksgiving Ho1iday - Academic Ho1iday
3
December Thursday — Dead1ine for submission of app1ication and receipt of a11
materia1s for admission, readmission or transfer to the C011ege of Law-
for Spring Semester 1984
December Thursday — Last day to sit for a fina1 examination for candidates for
a December graduate degree 1983
December~ Friday — End of c1ass work
December Friday — Dead1ine for app1ying for admission or readmission to the
Graduate Schoo1 for the Spring Semester 1984
December Monday through Friday — Fina1 Examinations
December Friday — Last day to submit a thesis/dissertation to the Graduate Schoo1
for candidates for a December degree 1983
December Friday - End of Fa11 Semester
December Monday - Fina1 dead1ine for submission of grades to the Registrar's
Office by 4 p.m.
December Wednesday — Last day advanced registered students may pay $50 to confirm
their Spring registration
SUMMARY 9£_TEACHING DAYS, FALL SEMESTER 1983
Mon. Tues. Wed. Thurs. Fri. Sat. Teaching Days
August August 7
September September 25
October October 26
November November 23
December December 8
Tota1s 89
1984
January 9
January 10
January 10
January 11
January 11—17
January 17
January 17
January 24
January 24
January 31
January 31
February 1
February 2
February 9
February 15
March 1
March 1
March 12
March
March 31
Apri1 1
Apri1
Apri1
Apri1
Apri1
Apri1
Apri1
Apri1
UNIVERISTY CALENDAR
1984 Spring Semester
Monday Registration for new students who have not advance registered
Tuesday Centra1ized add/drop for advance registered students
Tuesday Last day a student may officia11y drop a course or cance1
registration with the Registrar for a fu11 refund of fees
Wednesday - C1ass work begins
Wednesday through Tuesday — Late registration for returning students
who did not advance register and new app1icants c1eared 1ate for admis-
sion. A $20 1ate fee is assessed students who register 1ate.
Tuesday - Last day to enter an organized c1ass for Spring Semester
Tuesday - Last day to officia11y withdraw from the University and
receive an 80% refund
Tuesday - Last day for new students to pick up ID cards from Photo—
graphic Services in order to avoid rep1acement fee
Tuesday — Last day for payment of registration fees and/or housing and
dining fees in order to avoid cance11ation of registration and/or mea1 card
Tuesday - Last day to change grading option (pass/fai1 to 1etter grade
or 1etter grade to pass/fai1; credit to audit or audit to credit)
Tuesday - Last day to drop a course without it appearing on the
student's transcript
Wednesday - Dead1ine for submitting app1ication for admission to the
Co11ege of Dentistry for Fa11 1984
Thursday Last day for reinstatement of students cance11ed for non-
payment of registration fees and/or housing and dining fees. Requires
payment of fees p1us $50 reinstatement fee
Thursday Last day for fi1ing an app1ication in co11ege dean's office
for a May degree
Wednesday — Last day for submission of app1ication for admission to the
Co11ege of Law for Fa11 Semester 1984
Thursday — Last day to drop a course
Thursday - Last day to withdraw from the University or reduce course
schedu1e and receive any refund
Monday — Last day to pay thesis/dissertation fees in Student Bi11ing
Services Office for a May degree
Monday through Saturday — Spring vacation — Academic Ho1idays
Saturday — Last day for receipt of a11 supporting credentia1s for Fa11
Semester 1984, Co11ege of Law
Sunday - Dead1ine for app1ying for admission or readmission for any 1984
summer session for a11 categories of undergraduate app1icants wishing to
be inc1uded in the Apri1 Advising Conferences for the Summer Session
Thursday — Last day to schedu1e a fina1 examination in the Graduate Schoo1
for candidates for May degree 1984
Saturday - Last day to app1y to Graduate Admissions Office for admission
and readmission for Summer Sessions 1984
Monday through Wednesday - Advance registration for 1984 Fa11 Semester
and both Summer Sessions
Thursday - Last day to sit for a fina1 examination for candidates for
a May 1984 graduate degree
Thursday 1984 Summer Session Advising Conference for new freshmen, ad—
vanced sta