xt76m9022c6q https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt76m9022c6q/data/mets.xml University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate Kentucky University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate 1993-09-20  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, September 20, 1993 text University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, September 20, 1993 1993 1993-09-20 2020 true xt76m9022c6q section xt76m9022c6q LHMVERSHY OF KENTUCKY



2 September 1993

Members, University Senate

The University Senate will meet in regular session on Monday,
September 20, 1993, at 3:00 p.m. in ROOM 201 of the Nursing Building
(CON/HSLC). PLEASE NOTE: The date and room have been changed for
this meeting. Hereafter, the Senate will meet the second MOnday of
the month when school is in session in room 115, Nursing Building.


Minutes (April 12 and May 3, 1993)

Remarks: President Charles T. Wethington, Jr.

Chair's Announcements and Introductions


Action Items

a. Recommendation to the President to amend the Administrative
Regulations, AR. II — 1.0-2, p. III—2. (Circulated under
date of 3 September 1993.)
Proposed changes to University Senate Rules, Section V,

Attending the University. (Circulated under date of 7
September 1993.)


Randall Dahl

Note: If you are unable to attend this meeting, please contact Ms.
Susan Caldwell (7—7155) in advance. Thank you.




The University Senate met in regular session at 3:00 p.m., Monday, September
20, l993, in Room 20l of the Nursing Health Sciences Building.

Daniel L. Fulks, Chairperson of the Senate Council, presided.

Members absent were: William Adkisson, Reginald J. Alston, Stephanie Atcher,
John R. Ballantine*, Robert L. Blevins*, Douglas A. Boyd, Joseph T. Burch, Clyde R.
Carpenter*, Ben W. Carr, Edward A. Carter, Shea Chaney, G.L. Monty Chappell*,
Donald B. Clapp, Darby Cole, Melissa Cox, Richard Edwards, Raymond Forgue*, Michael
B. Freeman, Richard W. Furst, Lorraine Garkovich, William Gibson, J. John Harris
III, Zafar S. Hasan, Christine Havice*, James Hertog, Kenneth K. Kubota, Gretchen
LaGodna*, Thomas W. Lester, C. Oran Little, Robert F. Lorch, Jr., Linda J. Magid*,
Jan McCulloch*, Martin J. McMahon, Jr., Douglas C. Michael*, Sandra Miller, James
S..Mosbey, Phyllis J. Nash, Anthony L. Newberry, Jack W. 0lson*, Barbara Phillips,
Rhoda—Gale Pollack, Thomas C. Robinson, Edgar L. Sagan*, W. Craig Shellhart*, David
Shipley, Thomas J. Stipanowich, David H. Stockham, Michael Stover, Louis J. Swift.
Theodore R. Tauchert*, Phillip A. Tibbs, Miroslaw Truszczynski*, Henry C.
Vasconez*, Brent White*, Carolyn A. Williams, Eugene R. Williams.

The Chair welcomed President Wethington, members of the Senate, and visitors to
the first meeting of the University Senate for this academic year. He stated that
it was truly an honor and a privilege for him to serve as presiding officer of the
Senate and the Senate Council. He believes it shoUld be an interesting and
exciting year for the University as well as the Senate.

He feels in many ways the University is still reeling from the onslaught of
reviews and evaluations which have taken place during the past couple of years.
Some internal reviews, some self-studies, some outside reviews. And, in addition,
the University suffered another budget cut and is threatened by additional cuts.

It is only through the personal efforts of President Wethington that the University
was able to escape the most recent swing of the budget sathe, something which is
appreciated. It is now time to respond and react to the end products of these
recent reviews. Such responses, he believes, would be easy in times of bountiful
resources, not so easy in these times however. Therefore, he thinks the actions of
members of the Senate and the participation in the academic governance of the
University will be of particular importance this year.

During the summer months Professor Fulks spent quite a lot of time, with the
help of other members of the Senate Council, contemplating an agenda for the Senate
Council as well as the University Senate for the coming year. Several issues and
projects have been identified for their attention, a couple of those will be looked
at later on in the meeting. Throughout the entire process during the summer, one
rather elusive issue kept coming to his mind, something he had been thinking about

* Absence Explained


 Minutes, University Senate, September 20, l993

for a few years, and that is the issue of community spirit. It is easy when the
budget crunch has hit to lose sight of community spirit. In working with various
friends from across the Lexington campus and the Medical Center over the past
several years, on occasion he has had reason to be a little alarmed about what
appears to be a loss of community spirit on campus. Some of this is understandable
as each fight for their fair share of what is a less than adequate resource pie.
Nevertheless, such territorial behavior is counter productive. He likes what
Ernest Boyer of the Carnegie Foundation said about the University community. Boyer
suggested that a University or College is above all a purposeful community. A
place where teaching and learning matter most. He says that if academic concerns
are not vitally sustained and faculty and students do not come together around a
common intellectual quest, that all the talk about strengthening community in
higher education is simply a diversion. Therefore, today he encourages each to
think beyond the boundaries of their academic units as they go about the task of
creating their own individual professional environment, and as they help to shape
the environment of their academic units and offer their services on the University
Senate. We must begin to think and act for the good of the University Community,
all of its faculty, all of its units, all of its missions, and above all, all of
its students. This community spirit, he believes, can only begin at a very
individual and personal level. Whether we verbalize it or not, most of us are in
academia largely because we believe we at least have an opportunity to make a
difference somewhere. We do indeed have such an opportunity as faculty, as
administrators, as student leaders, and as members of the Senate. He hopes each of
us will maximize that opportunity. He is personally excited about where we are
right now as a University and excited about where we have the potential to go. He'

looks forwarded to working with all of them during this year.

The Chairman stated that the agenda for the meeting had been distributed. Item
l called for approval of minutes from two meetings. No corrections were made to
the Senate Minutes for April 12, l993 or May 3, l993. They were approved as
written and distributed.

The Chair then stated it was his pleasure to introduce to the Senate the
President of the University, who traditionally addresses the Senate at its first
meeting. The President actually_is officially the Chair and Presiding Officer of
the Senate. However, he chooses to delegate that responsibility to the Chair of
the Senate Council. In introducing President Methington, Professor Fulks said he
would like to note as had been noted in the past by his predessors, that since
assuming his position as chair in mid-May, he already has had the opportunity to
work closely with President Methington on several occasions and, as has been the
case in years past, he has been extremely cooperative and has invited input from
the Senate Council on all relative issues that have arisen. He has made it clear
that he is available at any time. His open and cooperative attitude is sincerely
appreciated by all on the Senate Council. He asked the Senate to please join him
in welcoming President Methington.

President Charles Methington was given a round of applause.

The President's "Address to the University Senate" is attached to the Minutes.


 Minutes, University Senate, September 20, 1993

In concluding, the President expressed his appreciation to the Senate for
helping to make the past year a bearable one, for helping to get off to an
excellent beginning for l993, and to reassure them it was his intent to work with
them on serious issues and matters which impact the entire University. It is also

.his intent in working with them to ensure they do everything they can to bring the
resources of the University to ensure that next year this University is a little
better than this year and the year after that a little better than it is next
year. We will constantly and consistently build the quality of this great
University. Thank you for having me here today.

, After his remarks the President was again given a round of applause.
The Chair thanked President Methington for visiting with the Senate.

The Chair then reminded the Senate that when they were addressing the body to
please stand and state their name for the record and their academic unit.

Chairman Fulks made the following introductions: Ms. Celinda Todd, who is the
Administrative Assistant for the Senate Council. He said that all Council Chairs ,
before him would tell them exactly how much trouble they would be in if it weren't
for Cindi. He then introduced Gifford Blyton who is the Parliamentarian and has
held that position for approximately 20 years. He is a Professor Emeritus for the
University and has been retired for 17 years from what now is the Department of
Communications. Dr. Randy Dahl who is the University Registrar and the official
Secretary of the Senate and Susan Caldwell, Recording.Secretary.

During the Spring, Loys Mather was elected as faculty member to the University
Board of Trustees, he replaces Carolyn Bratt whose term expired. Loys serves with
Dr. Deborah Powell, Lance Dowdy, the student representative and John Sistarnek from
the Community College System. In the Spring, Lance Dowdy was elected president of
the Student Government Association and along with that he serves as a student
member on the University Board of Trustees. Horst Schach was appointed as
University Academic Dmbud and replaces Gretchen LaGodna, his appointment was
effective July l, l993. The Sergeants at Arms are Jackie Hager from the
Registrar's Office and Michelle Sohner from the Academic Ombud's Office serving her
first year.

The Senate Council members are Louise Zegeer, Nursing; Bill Lyons, Political
Science; Ray Cox, Mathematics; who is also the Chair Elect of the Senate Council,
Deborah Powell, Pathology; Enid Haldhart, Communications; Ed Sagan, Educational
Policy Studies; John Piecoro, Pharmacy; Bradley Canon, Political Science; Antimony
Bishop, Student Representative; and another student to be named later. Exofficio
members are Loys Mather as Board of Trustee Member and Lance Dowdy.

The Chair stated he would like to recognize the Chairs of the Standing Senate
Committees. There are 85 faculty members of the University Senate, there are
another l8 student members, and various administrative members as well. There are
ll standing committees in the Senate, each is chaired by a faculty senator, with
one exception. The Rules and Elections Committee is chaired by Roy Moore from
Communications, Library Committee by Timothy Sineath from Library and Information
Science, Admissions and Academic Standards Committee by Bill Lubawy from Pharmacy,
Academic Organization and Structure Committee by Jim Knoblett from Accounting,


 Minutes, University Senate, September 20, l993

Research Committee by Mark Berger from Economics, Academic Facilities by Janet
Stith from Medical Center Library, Institutional Finance and Resource Allocation by
Lance DeLong from Physics and Astronomy, Admissions Advisory Committee by Davy
Jones from Toxicology, University Studies Committee by Louis Swift, Academic
Planning and Priorities by Mary Shake from Curriculum and Instruction, and Academic
Programs Committee by Debra Aaron from Animal Sciences. The Chair thanked the
Committee Chairs for agreeing to serve as chairs of the standing committees.

The Chair made the following announcements;

Homecoming - we are a week away from Homecoming week and visiting with the
Senate is Miss Caroline Shivley who is the chair of the Homecoming Committee for
the Student Activities Board. As faculty advisor to the Student Activities Board,
the Chair knows how much work is done. The biggest Homecoming events are on
Friday, October lst. There is a parade which will be followed by the Wildcat
Roar. The theme this year is Mardi Gras. He would like to encourage faculty to be
involved in the Homecoming activities.

UK Women's Studies Program - there will be a special program by and for the
female faculty, on September 22nd at 7:00 p.m. in the Recital Hall of the
Singletary Center. The program titled “Celebrating UK's Nomen Faculty" will
feature a panel of five female faculty who will speak about relevant issues and
reSponsibilities they have faced while climbing the professional ladder at the

The President has put in place a Search Advisory Committee for the Chancellor
of the Medical Center. Dr. Bosomworth is resigning after 23 years at the
University. Chairman Fulks asked the Senate to join him in recognizing Dr.
Bosomworth. Dr. Bosomworth“was given a round of applause. There are l2 members on
. the committee and their names are known, if anyone would like to know who they are
they can call the Senate Council or the President's office. Dr. Bosomworth is also
serving as Honorary Chair of the UK United Nay. At the close of the meeting there
will be a short presentation on United Nay.

There was some Senate Council action during the summer. At the request of the
College of Nursing, in regard to a RN MSN program, and in accordance with Senate
Rule l.3.l.l H, the Senate Council acted in behalf of the full Senate in what was
deemed an emergency situation. The Council approved as amended the new curricular
Option in the existing RN BSN and MSN programs and the admission standards as
submitted by the College of Nursing. This action was circulated dated July 30.

The President alluded to the Ulack Committee which did outstanding work over
, the last several months in helping to formulate a new administrative regulation
concerning the review of Academic Chief Administrative Officers. There is now a
new Part Two to Administrative Regulations 2-1.0 - l.6. This AR is based on the
work of that Ad Hoc Committee chaired by Dick Ulack which sought faculty, staff,
and administrative input into development of the AR. After the President wrote
what he thought was the final version of the AR, it was given back. The Chair
feels they had sufficient opportunity to provide him with input, all of which he
listened to, and most of which he responded to in a positive manner. That AR was
circulated fairly recently.


 Minutes, University Senate, September 20, l993

The Medical Center Honor Code - on April 4, 1993, the University Senate
approved the College of Medicine Honor Code. That approval was contingent upon the
development of procedural guidelines which were to be approved by the Senate
Council. Such guidelines were developed and submitted by the College of Medicine.
They were approved by the Senate Council on July 20, l993.

Family Leave - last year the Senate requested that the President consider an AR
which would have stopped the tenure clock. It would have halted the probationary
period for family leave. At that time the President rejected the request.

However, when the federally mandated Federal Leave Policy was put into effect this
Summer, he took it upon himself to reopen conversation about the Tenure Clock
Issue. The Chair is pleased to say there will be some provision in place for
stoppage of the tenure clock for family leave. They are not quite where they want
to be with it, but the President is working with them, Juanita Fleming is working
with them, and there is a focus group together to discuss how to implement such a
family leave. Actually, the authority has been given to Chancellors at this point
to grant a suspension of the probationary period for family leave. The regulations
will be formalized and finalized fairly soon.

There will be two Ad Hoc Committees put together very soon. One is a committee
on the Structure of Senate Committees. Every year there are reports from the
Senate Standing Committees. Two of the reports this year recommended abolishing
their committees. If anyone would like to serve or nominate someone, let the
Senate Council know. The other Ad Hoc Committee is going to deal with several
issues that have arisen concerning the Merit Review and Promotion Process. There
have been six or eight related issues that have been identified. One was the
Family Leave Issue, which will still need to be addressed to some extent. There is
a proposal that has been offered by Gretchen LaGodna and Rick Edwards concerning
replacing the two and four year reviews with a three year review. Other issues
involve the DOE, the reward structure, enhancing and rewarding teacher and
advising, and several issues involving the merit review and promotion process.

The next meeting will be October ll, l993. This meeting is one week late
because of scheduling problems. We will return to the regular schedule next month,
which calls for a meeting the second Monday of each month. The meeting will be at
3:00 p.m. October ll, l993 in Room ll5 of the Nursing Health Sciences Building.

The Chair recognized Professor Ray Cox, Chair-elect of the Senate Council to
present a resolution.

September 20, l993

Traditionally, at the first meeting of the University Senate in the
Fall, we recognize the leadership and effort of our past year's chair.
This resolution is offered to thank and commend John J. Piecoro, Jr. for
his dedicated and energetic leadership as presiding officer of the
University Senate and Chair of the Senate Council.

John's tenure began in May of l992 at a time when we were winding up our
internal self-study and preparing for the Fall l993 site visit of the


 Minutes, University Senate, September 20, l993

Southern Association's evaluation team. Following this visit, the
campus became involved with restructuring, budget cuts, realignments,
and related matters. Also we were dealing with Honor Codes presented by
Law, Medicine, and Pharmacy. All in all, it was a very busy year and
one that required steady, even handed and intelligent leadership -- all
of which John provided —- and with good humor as well.

John Piecoro showed an exceptional ability to work with faculty,
administration and staff on matters involving serious controversy and
reach accommodations and agreements that left all parties satisfied that
their cases had been heard, understood, and seriously considered and
that fair resolutions had been reached. He was also quite effective in
communicating the faculty and Senate's concerns to the administration
and making the entire institution a more open place.

We all are in debt to John for these efforts. He brought to us a -
positive attitude, an irrepressible humor, and the ability to see the
bright side of every issue while, at the same time, recognizing the
possible pitfalls.

John, please accept the sincere thanks of the Senate Council and the
entire Senate for your leadership, your hard work, and your dedication
to the University of Kentucky. We have benefitted from it, we are
better for it, and we sincerely appreciate it. Thank you very much.

Professor Piecoro was given a round of applause.

Professor Cox moved that the resolution be included in the minutes and a copy
sent to Professor Piecoro.

Professor Deborah Powell was recognized for the following resolution.

September 20, l993

Presented to the University of Kentucky Faculty Senate in appreciation for the
service of Professor Carolyn Bratt, Faculty Representative, University of
Kentucky Board of Trustees, July 1, l990 to June 30, l993.

I believe that I speak for the faculty of the University of Kentucky in
presenting this resolution of thanks and appreciation to Professor Carolyn
Bratt, the w. L. Matthews Professor of Law, for her service to us and to our

Professor Bratt has served our University and its faculty and students in many
arenas during her l8 years on this campus.

Carolyn joined the University of Kentucky College of Law faculty in 1975. From
l984 to l989, she was the Alumni Professor of Law and in l989 was appointed as
the w.L. Matthews Professor of Law. She has been recognized since early in her


 Minutes, University Senate, September 20, I993

career as a skilled and dedicated teacher. She received the College of Law
Outstanding Teacher awards in l977 and l979, the UK Alumni Association Great
Teacher Award in l985, the Faculty Advisor Excellence Award of the UK Student
Organizations Assembly in l989, and the Duncan Award for Excellence in Teaching
from the UK College of Law in l990. She is recognized by her peers locally and
nationally as a leader in her profession serving as Special Justice to the
Kentucky Supreme Court and receiving the Cassis Award for Excellence in legal
Research and Scholarship from the UK College of Law in 1989. She has also
received numerous awards for her public service from local, state, and national
groups to which she has willingly given her time, energy and incisive intellect.

Some of Carolyn's greatest contributions, however, have been to her faculty
colleagues at the University of Kentucky. She has served us faithfully, with
forthrightness, integrity, and with deep caring and concern for our University
in the highest areas of elective and appointed responsibility for a faculty
member. She has served as the Chair of the University Senate Ad Hoc Committee
on the Status of Women and co-authored its landmark report. She was a faculty
’representative to the l990 Presidential Search Committee, and has served as an
elected member of the University Faculty Senate, the Senate Council, and, from
l990-9l as Chair of the University Senate Council. In 1990 she was elected
faculty representative to the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees. In
June of this year, she concluded her term as a Board member.

During the past year Carolyn has been‘the recipient of an American Council of
Education (ACE) Fellowship, designed to introduce faculty to academic
administration. I am certain that as Carolyn makes the transition into
academic administration she will take with her an understanding and
appreciation for the concerns and hopes of faculty and students whom she has
served so tirelessly and sometimes at great personal cost. The faculty of the
University of Kentucky are grateful to this outstanding woman for her service
to us, and for myself and on their behalf, I would like to thank her for her
work. I hope that my fellow members of this Senate will join me in recognizing
her service.

Mr. Chairman, I move that this resolution be spread upon the minutes of the
Senate and that a copy be sent to Professor Bratt.

Professor Bratt was given a round of applause.
Chairman Fulks thanked Professor Powell and Professor Cox for their resolutions.

The Chair recognized Professor Ray Cox, Chair-elect of the Senate Council, for
the first action item on the agenda. Professor Cox, on behalf of the Senate
Council, moved approval of the proposed recommendation to amend the Administrative
Regulations, AR II - 1.0 - l, p. III-2. The proposal was circulated to members of
the Senate under the date of 3 September l993. Professor Fulks stated that what
the Senate Council was asking for was the Senate's endorsement. Such a request as
this has been submitted to the President twice before, as indicated in the
background. This would be the first time it has come from the full Senate.
Essentially, what we are asking for is that a person who has been denied tenure at
the college level should have the right to appeal to the area committee.


 Minutes, University Senate, September 20, l993


The floor was opened for discussion. The question was called. In a voice vote
motion unanimously passed and reads as follows:


WHEREAS we the faculty of the University of Kentucky believe all
faculty, regardless of rank, are entitled to the identical due process
as regards consideration for promotion; and

WHEREAS we further believe that all faculty, regardless of rank, are
entitled to the identical and appropriate appeals avenues; and

WHEREAS the current Administrative Regulations of the University deny
equal consideration and appeal opportunity to faculty at the Assistant
Professor level; and


WHEREAS the University's Administrative Regulations concerning
promotion at the Assistant Professor level should be consistent with
those at the Associate Professor level; and

WHEREAS to ensure review by the appropriate Academic Area Advisory
Committee, to which faculty members are entitled;


If the dean makes a decision not to recommend the faculty member
for promotion and tenure, the dean shall notify the individual of this
action in writing, before the end of the sixth or the next—to-last year
of the individual's probationary period. The faculty member may then
request in writing to the dean that his or her promotion dOSSier be



forwarded to the appropriate chancellor or vice president. Upon


receiVing such a request, the dean Will forward the dOSSier, with his or


her recommendation, to the chancellor or vice president. After


examining the dOSSier for completeness, the chancellor or Vice president


shall submit the dOSSier to the relevant Area Committee for review.


Upon completion of the reView, the Area Committee shall recommend to the


Chancellor or Vice preSident in the usual manner.


Background and Rationale:

Similar requests for this proposed change in the Administrative
Regulations have been forwarded to the President's Office on at least

two occaSions in recent history. In January of l990 a proposal was

submitted by the Senate Council. This was followed by a request from
the Senate Advisory Committee on Privilege and Tenure as a part of its
annual report in August of l992. Both requests were rejected by
President Wethington on the grounds that (l) "the Dean of a college
should have a central role in decision making at critical points in the
deVelopment of college programs" and (2) it is now feasible for an
assistant professor to appeal a decision to the Chancellor or Vice
President, the Senate Advisory Committee on Privilege and Tenure, and
the President.


 Minutes, University Senate, September 20, l993

Nonetheless, the Advisory Committee on Privilege and Tenure
strongly believes that the right of review at the Chancellor and Area
Committee level should be extended to assistant professors. The
proposed change in Administrative Regulations would ensure that faculty
at this critical juncture would have access to a review by the broadest
possible body, the same right that is now afforded tenured faculty
members seeking promotion. While faculty denied promotion and tenure at
the college level can indeed avail themselves of an appeal process, the
procedures are time—consuming and often inadequately understood by
faculty. Further, appeals can frequently result in adversarial and
acrimonious working relationships. Ironically, a non-tenured faculty
member currently has the right to appeal a dean's favorable decision but
not a denial. Experiences of the P&T Advisory Committee have
consistently reaffirmed the need for this revision over recent years.


Note: If endorsed, the proposal will be forwarded to the President for '

The Chair recognized Ray Cox for the next agenda item. Professor Cox, on
behalf of the Senate Council moved approval of the proposed changes to the
University Senate Rules, Section V, with regard to the marking system. This item
was distributed under the date of 7 September l993.

The floor was opened for discussion.

Professor Hans Gesund (Engineering) referred to the first page and the first
proposal. He said he was not sure what successful completion of a course taken for
audit means. He suggested that the word successful be struck, because there is no
such thing as unsuccessful completion. He said that ”a course taken for audit” is
bad English, you do not take a course for audit, you take a course for educational
purposes. He moved the wording be changed to "AU represents a completion of a
course attended as an audit".

Professor Fulks stated those changes would be incorporated.

Professor Gesund had a question about Section 5.l.5 and the sentence that reads
”Normally, students who audit would be expected to do the readings and attend
class". He asked what if the students did not attend class? He said there was a
provision for students who did not attend class, they could be forced out with a
w. But if they just come to class and do not do the readings there isn't anything
the instructor can do about it. He is not sure we should be saying things the
instructor does not have the power to enforce.

Professor Fulks acknowledged Professor David Durant. He said that the action
item is about one-third of the output of the Durant Committee. Professor Durant,
Dr. Dahl, and other members of the committee worked rather hard last year and this
is only part of the output. He also feels this is the least controversial portion
of the committee's recommendations.

Professor Fulks said that he felt in reference to Professor Gesund's question
that the information was there for the benefit of the student. We try to
discourage the students from signing up for an audit and never showing up or doing
any work. In his opinion it does not hurt anything being there.


 Minutes, University Senate, September 20, l993

Dr. Randall Dahl said there-was an option available to the faculty member when
attendance is required. Whether or not it should be restated such that the
instructor had a similar option available to force attendance if the student
auditing the course did not participate appropriately. It would be a lot more work
for the faculty member to monitor.

Professor Dan Reedy (Graduate School) asked for an interpretation of Section
5.l.8.4 which states "the student shall be recommended for that degree by the
Senate of the University. If a comprehensive examination is required for
graduation, this requirement shall be waived“. He asked if that refers to a course
exam and would not infer a comprehensive exam for a doctorate or for a masters.

Professor Fulks said that was correct. He also said that wording was not new.
Professor Reedy said he wanted to make sure with the other changes that had been
made that the sense of a comprehensive course examination was not left out.
Professor Fulks said that there would be nothing wrong with adding "comprehensive
course examination" to this change. Professor Reedy said he wanted to make sure
that it was clearly understood. Professor Reedy then moved that entry of the word
“course" be included. In a voice vote the motion carried.

Professor William Lubawy (Pharmacy) was curious as to why in Section 5.l.5 the
clause "if attendance is required in the course” had been added. It seemed to him
that if attendance is not required for the regular students that is okay because
the faculty member knows the students are doing things because of exams, quizzes,
and other things that are done. An auditor does not take the exams and many
classes do not require attendance so if they do not go, he doesn't know why they
Signed up for it. He wishes the statement were not included. »

Professor Lance DeLong (Physics and Astronomy) suggested to Dr. Dahl that in
courses where laboratories or equipment are essential, supplies might be limited.