xt76t14tmt26 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt76t14tmt26/data/mets.xml University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate Kentucky University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate 1969-10-20  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, October 20, 1969 text University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, October 20, 1969 1969 1969-10-20 2020 true xt76t14tmt26 section xt76t14tmt26      

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   
 

Minutes of the University Senate, October 13, 1969

   
    
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
   
     
 

(Cont'd.)

SCHOLARSHIPS, GRANTS-IN-AID, AND FINANCIAL AID

 

An applicant for, or a recipient of University
financial aid, a University grant—in—aid, or a
University scholarship has the right not to be
discriminated against because of race, color,
religion, or national origin.

 

University grant-in—aid, or a University scholar—
ship are those that the University administers
by selecting the recipient and allocating the funds.

3.14 USE QF_FACILITIES AND SERVICES

 

A student has the right to all University student

facilities and services on a fair and equitable basis. _
However, the University may restrict its facilities |
and services when their use would interfere with W
normal University operations. The University may ‘
also delineate the purpose for which students may I
use certain facilities. t

1

I

l

I
In this context, University financial aid, a I
1
(
I

3.15 DISCRIMINATION IN THE COMMUNITY

 

A student has the right to expect the University
to exert its influence both on campus and in the
community to eliminate discrimination on the basis
of race, color, religion, or national origin.

3.24, and 3.25 and recommended that these Sections be included in the Code

under new ARTICLE III for recommendation to the Board through the President.
Following extensive discussion motion was made and seconded to amend the motion to
delete Section 3.23 from the Code. After additional discussion motion was made .
and approved to recess the meeting until 4:00 p.m., Monday, October 20, 1969, r
when the Senate will reconvene in the Court Room of the Law Building to (F..
continue consideration of these Sections, subsequent sections, and the additional
recommendations.

(
Dr. Plucknett then presented proposed new Sections 3.2, 3.21, 3.22, 3.23, \
I

The Senate recessed at 5:40 p.m.

The Senate reconvened at 4:00 p.m., Monday, October 20, 1969, in the Court
Room of the Law Building. Chairman Ogletree presided. Members absent: 1
Clifford Amyx, Ronald Atwood, Charles Auvenshine, Lyle N. Back*, Norman F. 1
Billups, H. Martin Blacker? Herbert Bruce, Marion A. Carnes*, Clyde R. Carpenter*,
Robert E. Cazden, Virgil L. Christian, Jr., Maurice A. Clay, Carl B. Cone*,

Robert L. Cosgriff*, Eugene L. Crawford, Jr., M. Ward Crowe, Charles F. Davis, III,

Loretta Denman*, David E. Denton, R. Lewis Donohew, John P. Drysdale, W. G. Duncan, }
W. W. Ecton, Frank J. Essene, Joseph B. Fugate, Roy F. Gabbard, Milton E. Gellin*, ‘3
James L. Gibson, William A. Gordon*, Ben R. Gossick, Michael E. Hall, Virgil W. X;\

Hays, Eugene Huff, James D. Kemp, John E. Kennedy, Albert D. Kirwan? Robert W.
Kiser, Donald E. Knapp*, James F. Lafferty*, Walter G. Langlois*, Melvin J. Lerner,
Albert S. Levy, Albert J. Lott, Ray Marshall, Marucs T. McEllistrem, Richard I. Millerb

7"Absence explained

 

     
    
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
     
   
    
 
  
 
   
   
   
  
    
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
   
    

 

 

:o I
;.
«F «
I"
6
x
l
l
7
r
y'
3
E,
1, T
, i
fix . -\\.
,- :43“
- l
. , .
11613;"

Minutes of the University Senate, October 20, 1969 (Cont'd.)

 

Arthur K. Moore, Dean H. Morrow*, Jacqueline A. Noonan*, Richard P. O'Neill,
Harold F. Parks*, Doyle E. Peaslee, Ronald E. Phillips, Curtis Phipps*,
Nicholas J. Pisacano, John L. Ragland, Leonard A. Ravitz*, John W. Roddick,
Benjamin F. Rush, Donald E. Sands*, John W. Schaefer*, Rudolph Schrils,
Ralph Shabetai, Robert Straus, Timothy H. Taylor, Duane N. Tweeddale*, Harold

H. Van Horn, David R. Wekstein*, David C. White, Raymond A. Wilkie, W. W.
Winternitz, J. D. Wirtschafter, Donald J. Wood*, N. W. Bradley, Jean M. Hayter*,
J. W. Hollingsworth*, Vernon L. James, Otis A. Singletary, Alvin L. Morris,
William R. Willard*, George J. Ruschell, Glenwood L. Creech, Lewis W. Cochran*,
Lawrence A. Allen, Charles E. Barnhart, Harry M. Bohannan, Marcia A. Dake*,
George W. Denemark, Harold D. Gordon, Joseph Hamburg, Ellis F. Hartford,

Raymon D. Johnson*, William S. Jordan, Jr.*, Leonard V. Packett, John C.
Robertson*, Doris M. Seward, Eugene J. Small*, Joseph V. Swintosky*, Ernest

F. Witte, Joseph J. Massie.

The Senate approved the requests of Bill Matthews, Jeannie Leedom, and
Ken Weaver to attend, report and photograph the meeting.

The amendment on the floor to delete Section 3.23 from the Code was withdrawn.

Dr. Sedler presented a motion to amend Section 3.23 to delete the phrase,
"is requested by his parents or'' from the second sentence. The Senate approved
this motion.

On behalf of the Senate Council, Dr. Plucknett presented a motion to amend
Section 3.23 by adding the word ”academic” between the words ”students” and
”record” in the second sentence. The Senate approved this motion.

On behalf of the Senate Council, Dr. Plucknett presented a motion to amend
Section 3.24 to add the word "Normally" as the first word of the paragraph. The
Senate defeated this motion.

Dr. Stanford Smith presented amendments to Section 3.21 as follows:
1. Change the first paragraph to read as follows:

A student has the right to be free from unreasonable
intrusions into his privacy and from unreasonable searches
and seizures of his person and possessions while on University
property.

The Senate approved this amendment as presented.

2. Combine the second and third paragraphs into one paragraph to
read as follows:

A student's residence hall room may only be entered or
searched, without his prior permission, in emergency cases
presenting clear evidence of dire and immediate danger to
life, health or property. Such searches must be authorized
and conducted by the Dean of Students. Entry into a student's
residence hall room for housekeeping or maintenance purposes
by authorized personnel shall not be deemed an intrusion subject
to the above restriction.

*Absence explained

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Minutes of the University Senate, October 13, 1969 (Cont'd.)

At this point in its deliberations the Senate approved a request by Mr. Hall,
Dean of Students, to suspend the agenda in order to permit him to read the
following statement:

The University Senate has before it for consideration the October 13,
1969 recommendations of the University Senate Advisory Committee for
Student Affairs for changes in the Code 9f_Student Conduct. As Dean of
Students I wish to state my position on the proposal for the general
information of the members of this body.

 

A Bill of Rights for students has been under consideration in
various forms for many months. I support the adoption and publication
of the rights guaranteed by the institution to its students. I also
agree that guarantees of due process should be made and published.

My concern is about the attempt to define and publish the specific
administrative procedures for the implementation of rights guaranteed
to students. In so doing, it would seem to me, there is a danger
inherent that rather than delineating rights and procedures, expecta—
tions are set which cannot be met on the one hand and restrictions are
imposed which are severly limiting on the other hand.

I would suggest that a broad statement of principles and policies
in line with the Joint Statement 92 Rights and Freedoms of Students, be
adopted and promulgated by the University of Kentucky, but that the
procedures for the specific administrative implementation of these
policies be determined by the related administrative officials of the
institution. This approach would avoid the ambiguity of statements
contained in the proposal currently before you and allow for interpre—
tation by the appropriate appellate board over all cases involving
violations of rights.

Further, as Dean of Students, I am not at all certain that I wish
to have delegated to me the broad jurisdiction that is being suggested.
For example, in Section 3.21 Person and Property, I am unable to interpret
exactly what constitutes ”premises controlled by the University." This
is a new term, so far as I know. In the second paragraph of that section
it would appear that the Dean of Students is given very broad powers
which would enable search of a student's room for food which is not
properly stored in "pest—proof" containers or a bottle containing an
alcoholic beverage which is "about to be" consumed. This could be done
without the student's consent or guarantee that appropriate University
personnel are to be present. For example, in the event of ”clear and immi—
nent danger of life, health, safety" it would seem desirable to have
representatives of our Safety and Security Division present.

 

It would be preferable, to my way of thinking, to state as a student
right: "A student has the right to be free from unreasonable intrusions
into his privacy and from unreasonable searches and seizures of his person
and property while on University property."

The administrative procedures for insuring this right then could be
developed to guard against intrusions for instances such as those I just
have cited. Any alleged violation of the right then could be heard by the
University Appeals Board.

 

 

 

  

‘ ‘f.

2831

Minutes of the University Senate, October 20, 1969 (Cont'd.)

All of this is to say that the adoption and publication of student
rights and the procedural due processes are highly desirable. The
inclusion of administrative procedures is a concept which is unacceptable
to me personally and a step which I feel will be detrimental in the long
run to students. It would be my hope that, at your direction, the Senate
Advisory Committee on Student Affairs would re—work their recommendations
to encompass the changes I have suggested. I know that time is an
element of consideration here, but the issue is one of such magnitude
that more thorough investigation and deliberations inclusive of all
points of view are of greater importance than moving expeditiously on
this matter.

I would request that this statement be read into the Minutes of this
meeting as a matter of record.

Motion was made to return Section 3.21 to Committee. The Senate defeated
this motion.

The Senate then defeated Dr. Smith's motion to combine paragraphs two and three
of Section 3.21 into a new paragraph as presented. The vote to defeat was 56
to 43.

Dr. Mason presented an amendment to Section 3.21 to substitute for all four
paragraphs therein the following paragraph:

A student has the right to be free from unreasonable search and
seizure as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights of the United States
Constitution and judicial precedents interpreting that right.

The Senate defeated this motion.

The Senate then approved all of Section 3.2 — RIGHT OF PRIVACY - which included
3.21, as amended, 3.22, 3.23, as amended, 3.24, and 3.25, for recommendation to
the Board of Trustees through the President. All of Section 3.2, as amended
and approved, reads as follows:

Section 3.2 RIGHT OF PRIVACY
3.21 PERSON AND PROPERTY

A student has the right to be free from unreasonable
intrusions into his privacy and from unreasonable searches
and seizures of his person and possessions while on Uni-
versity property.

When a University official has reason to believe that
a violation of a University disciplinary offense or a
University residence hall regulation has been, is being,
or is about to be committed, he may intrude into and search
a student's residence hall room only in the presence of
the student or upon written authorization from the Dean of
Students or his designee. The authorization shall state
the particular time and place of the search and the particular
property to be seized. However, no such authorization shall
be issued unless an appropriate reason is provided.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2832

Minutes of the University Senate, October 20, 1969 (Cont'd.)

3.

3.

 

 

.22

23

24

Entry into a student's residence hall room for house—
keeping purposes by authorized personnel in the course of
their customary duties, or by individuals in emergencies
presenting a clear and imminent danger of life, health,
safety, or property shall not be deemed an intrusion subject
to the required authorization procedures.

Students living in units not directly supervised by the
University are protected by the usual legal requirements for
searches and seizures and shall not be subject to such by
University officials.

DISCIPLINARY RECORDS

A student has the right to have his disciplinary record
kept separate and confidential unless he consents in writing
to have it revealed. However, the Dean of Students or the
corresponding official in professional schools may disclose
the student's record without his consent if legal compulsion
or the safety of people or property is involved, or if the
information is required by authorized University personnel
for official use. In these circumstances, only the information
pertinent to the inquiry may be revealed. The Dean or the
corresponding official may also act without the student's
consent to have a statement of expulsion or suspension entered
on his academic record for the time that this disciplinary
action would prohibit the student from registering for

courses. Notice of this statement shall be sent to the
student.

ACADEMIC RECORDS

A student has the right to have his academic record
kept separate and confidential unless he consents in writing
to have it revealed. However, the Registrar or his designee
may disclose the student's academic record without his con—
sent if the information is required by authorized University
personnel for official use, such as advising students, writing

recommendations,or selecting candidates for honorary organi—
zations.

COUNSELING RECORDS

A student has the right to have his counseling records
kept separate and confidential unless he consents in writing
to have it revealed. However, psychologists in the University
Counseling Center, counselors in the Office of Student Affairs
and psychiatrists in the Student Health Service may share
information if professional consultation is advisable. They
may also reveal information to an appropriate authority when
there is a clear and imminent danger to life, health, safety,
or property. And they may provide an evaluation of a student's
predicted academic ability upon request from his instructor,
advisor, dean or the dean's representative.

‘qf- ,—‘.,_.—~

      
  
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
   
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

 

OIl

 

1%

‘uL‘l'
V‘

Q

l

——————‘,N

Minutes of the University Senate, October 20, 1969

(Cont'd.)

 

3.25 EVALUATION OF STUDENT CHARACTER AND ABILITY

 

A student has the right to have his character and
ability evaluated only by individuals with a personal
knowledge of him. Records containing information about
a student's character shall indicate when the information
was provided, by whom, the position of this individual,
and his qualification for evaluating the student.

The Chairman announced that if there were no objections the Senate would stay
in session until 5:30, recess until 4:00 p.m., Monday, October 27, 1969, in the
Court Room of the Law Building when the Senate will reconvene to continue
deliberation of the Report. There were no objections to this proposal.

A Senator raised the question of the presence of a quorum. A count revealed
the absence of a quorum. The Senate then recessed until 4:00 p.m., Monday,
October 27th, at 4:00 p.m.

Meeting recessed at 5:10 p.m.

The Senate reconvened at 4:00 p.m., Monday, October 27, 1969, in the Court
Room of the Law Building. Chairman Ogletree presided. Members absent:
Staley F. Adams*, Clifford Amyx, Charles Auvenshine, Robert A. Baker, Norman F.
Billups, Richard C. Birkeback, Ben W. Black*, H. Martin Blacker? Wallace N.

Briggs*, Cecil Bull*, Marion A. Carnes, Clyde R. Carpenter*, Virgil L. Christian, Jr.,

Donald B. Coleman, Robert L. Cosgriff*, William B. Cotter, Clifford J. Cremers*,
Charles F. David III, Loretta Denman*, David E. Denton, R. Lewis Donohew, W. G.
Duncan, W. W. Ecton*, Fred Edmonds*, Roger Eichhorn*, Joseph Engelberg*, Frank J.
Essene, Joseph B. Fugate, Roy F. Gabbard, Jess L. Gardner*, Stephen M. Gittleson*,
Ben R. Gossick, Joseph J. Gruber, Michael D. Hall, Alfred S. L. Hu, John W.
Hutchinson*, Donald W. Ivey*, Don R. Jacobson, Albert D. Kirwan*, Robert W.
Kiser*, James A. Knoblett*, James F. Lafferty*, Carl E. Langenhop, Harold R.
Laswell*, Albert S. Levy, Richard V. McDougall, Marcus T. McEllistrem, Michael P.
McQuillen*, Richard I. Miller, George E. Mitchell, Dean H. Morrow, Theodore H.
Mueller, Vernon A. Musselman, Jacqueline A. Noonan*, Louis A. Norton, Horace A.
Norrell*, Richard P. O'Neill, Albert W. Patrick*, Nicholas J. Pisacano, Muriel

A. Poulin*, Leonard A. Ravitz, John W. Roddick, Robert W. Rudd, Donald E. Sands,
John W. Schaefer*, Rudolph Schrils, George W. Schwert, Robert A. Sedler*,

Ralph Shabetai, D. Milton Shuffett, Gerard E. Silberstein*, Emily V. Smith*,
William G. Survant, Duane N. Tweeddale*, Harold H. Van Horn, Harwin L. Voss*,
David R. Wekstein*, David C. White*, W. W. Winternitz*, Donald J. Wood*, N. W.
Bradley, Jean M. Hayter*, Vernon L. James, Otis A. Singletary, George J.
Ruschell, Glenwood L. Creech, Stuart Forth, Lewis W. Cochran*, Lawrence A.

Allen, Charles E. Barnhart, Harry M. Bohannan, Marcia A. Dake*, Robert M. Drake, Jr.,
Harold D. Gordon, Charles P. Graves, Joseph Hamburg, Ellis F. Hartford, Raymon
D. Johnson, William S. Jordan, Jr.*, Elbert W. Ockerman*, Leonard V. Packett,
John C. Robertson*, Doris M. Seward, Eugene J. Small, John L. Sutton, Ernest F.
Witte, Joseph L. Massie.

The Senate approved the requests of Jeannie Leedom, Jean Renaker, Kernel
reporters, and Dick Ware, Kernel photographer, to attend, report and photograph.

The Chair recommended that the Senate continue in session until 5:30, then

recess and reconvene at 7:00 p.m. At this point quorum was called for. A count
revealed the absence of a quorum. ‘

*Absence explained