xt77h41jmb4m https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt77h41jmb4m/data/mets.xml University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate Kentucky University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate 1981-12-07 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, December 7, 1981 text University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, December 7, 1981 1981 1981-12-07 2020 true xt77h41jmb4m section xt77h41jmb4m UNIVERS TY OF KENTUCKY LEXINGTON. KENTUCKY 40506 UNIVERSITY SENATE COUNCIL Io ADMINISTRATION BUILDING November 6 , 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: Members, University Senate FROM: James D. Kemp, Chairman WV RE: Senate Dates to Remember Due to scheduling conflicts, including an early final examination week and a major sporting event (UK:IU basketball) the following changes should be noted on your December calendars: 1. The December Senate meeting has been changed from Monday, December 14 to Monday, December 7 at 3:00 PM in CB 106. The Senate Christmas party has been scheduled for Tuesday, December ‘15,»x1981 from? 44:03) .ilzf'th' -Q§1*F~w.-r arse. Please mark your calendars accordingly. Details will be forth- coming. /cet AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY UNIVERSITY UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY LEXINGTON KENTUCKY 40506 UNIVERSITY SENATE COUNCIL 10 ADMINISTRATION BUILDING November 23, 1981 Members , University Senate The University Senate will meet on Monday, December 7, at 3:00 PM in room 106, Whitehall Classroom Building. éGENDA: University Senate Minutes, October 12, 1981. Remarks by the Chairman. Report of Faculty Members of the Board of Trustees. Action Items: a) Establishment of a quorum for the University Senate during the transition time. (Circulated under date of November 17, 1981.) Proposed revision in Senate Rules relative to the Double Major, Section V, 4. 4w (Circulated under date of November 19, 1981.) Proposed minimum enrollment in classes. (Circu- lated under date of November 16, 1981.) George Caddie Acting Secretary AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY UNIVERSITY MINUTES OF THE UNIVERSITY SENATE, DECEMBER 7, l98l The University Senate met in regular session at 3:00 p.m., Monday, December 7, l98l, in Room lO6 of the Classroom Building. James Kemp, presiding Members absent: M. M. Ali*, Paul J. Amatuzzo, Albert S. Bacdayan*, Michael A. Baer, Charles E. Darnhart, James C. Beidleman, Jack C. Blanton, James A. Bolihg*, Britt Brockman, James Boathoitz, Joseph T. Burch, Robert Calmes*, Harry M. Caudill, Donald B. Clapp, D. Kay Clawsoh, John Conklin, J. Donald Coonroc*, Gary L. Cromwell*, George Denemark, David E. Dehtoh, Philip A. DeSimone*, Alan DeYoung, Louis Diamond, Richard C. Domek, Joseph Dougherty, Herbert N. Drennon, Phillip A. Duncan, Anthony Eardley, Roger Eichhorn, Graeme Eairweather, Charles H. Fay*, Paul G. Forand*, Joseph Fugate*, Richard W. Furstt, Art Galiaher, Jr *, endrew J. Grimes*, Joseph Hamburg, S. Zafar Hasan*, Debbie Hertelendyt, Raymond R. Hornback, Charles Hultman, Michael Impey*, Gilbert Joehl, John J. Justt, David T. Kao”, Peri Jean Kennedy, Edward J. Kifer, Michael J. Kirkhorn*, Theodore A. Kotchent, Shea Lair*, James R. Lang, Thomas P. Lewis, Carolyn G. Litchfield*, Tim Mann, Kenneth E. Marine, James R. Marsden, Joseph L. Massie*, William L. Matthews, Sally S. Mattinglyt, Marion E_ McKennat, Daniel H. Miller, H. Brinton Milward*, John M. Mitchell*, Pamela Nickle-s, P. J. D'Connor*, James R. Ogletree*, Bernard Orr, Merrill W. Packer*. Clayton R. Pauit. Alan R. Perreiah, John J. Piecoro*, Janet Pisaneschit, David J. Priort, ~r"bert G Reidt, Donald E. Sands, Eugenie C. Scott, Jon M. Shepard*, D. Milton Shuffett*, . wahha Simpsont, Timothy W. Sineath, Otis A. Singletaryt, John T. Smith, Stanford L. Smith“. Mary Beth Speaks, Earl L. Steele, William Stober*, S. Sidney Ulmer, Marc J. Wallatet, David Web“ “fl, 0 Neal Weeks, James H. Wells, Charles Wethington, Paul A. Willis, Constance Wilson , h2ired D. Winer, Patch G. Woolfolkt, Nadine Wright, Robert G. Zumwinkiet Chairman Kemp began the meeting with the following remarks; “Today is somewhat of a special reminiscing day for those of us who are approaching the years when we may be dubbed senior citizens. I remember distinctly where I was and what I was doing on a Sunday a"terhoon exactly forty (40) years ago today. Just in case you people a i were not around at that time don't know to what I am referring, it was, as President Franklin D. Roosevelt described it, “a day that will live in infamy,” or the day the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. That ‘as one of the dark days in U.S. history. if we read the newspapers, watch television or listen to the radio, or even listen to some of our colleagues around campus, it seems that some people try to make this ”a time that will live in infamy.“ We are aware of unemployment, budget cuts, double digit inflation, campus happenings such as those related to the state's major cash crop and one of its major sports, freeze on hirings and a lot more nuisances. i use the word nuisances because in relation to our situation forty (40) years ago, that's all they are. There are some inconveniences, there are some disappointments and everything we want in our abundant way of living isn't always exactly as we would prefer. But before we criticize everything and everyone, let's look at ourselves and our surroundings; let's look at our University and emphasize the positive and ask ourselves: ”What‘s right with the University?” I am listing just a few items: *Absence explained -2- We have the second highest enrollment on record. We have had the best two years in the history of the Univer- sity in both percentage and dollars in pay raises. We have academic freedom to pursue our research and teach our classes. Most of us have tenure and, so far, there is no indication that we will not continue to be employed. We have many areas of excellence and some are getting better in spite of budget cuts. The Council on Higher Education has ruled that we are to be the flagship University for the Commonwealth. Flagships don't travel very far or very fast with sagging sails. Let's not be a sagging faculty. Let‘s take advantage of what we have, what we are and what we can be and make this truly the flagship University for which all Kentuckians can be proud. To again go back to the past——one of my favorite songs went something like this: You gotta' accentuate the positive Eliminate the negative Latch on to the affirmative And don't mess with mister in-between. The power of positive thinking works in many cases. It might even work here. Approval of the minutes of the meeting of October l2, l98l, was delayed until the meeting at the request of Student Senator Madeleine Yeh. The next item on the agenda was the information items from the Chairman. Professor made the following remarks: ”There are several items of information we want to pass on to you. First, we have some new members on the Senate Council. Two new members who are replacements for people who have resigned are Dr. Robert Bostrom, replacing Senator Harry Caudill and Malvaria Smith, student, has replaced Mark Vonderheide. Newly elected Council members who will begin their work the first of January are Professors Susan Belmore, Malcolm Jewell and Andy Grimes. The Rules Committee took the advice of the Senate from the last meeting and came up with a rule regarding who would be the voting ex officio members. They brought it to the Senate Council and the Senate Council approved it so I will read you the way the following members will be selected and who they will be. 'There shall be twelve (l2) ex officio voting members in the Senate. In academic years be— ginning with an even number (e.g., l982—83, l984-85), this group shall be composed of the following: The Vice President for the Medical Center, the Dean of the Graduate School and Coordinator of Research, -3- the Director of Libraries, the Assistant Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the Deans of the Colleges of Allied Health, Architecture, Communications, Dentistry, Education, Engineering, Law and Social Work. In academic years beginning with an odd number, the ex officio voting members shall be the following: The Vice President for Academic Affairs, the Vice President for the Community Colleges, the President of the Student Body, and the Deans of the Colleges of Agriculture, Arts and Sciences, Business and Economics, Fine Arts, Home Economics, Library Science, Medicine, Nursing and Pharmacy. In part ”B” all officials mentioned in paragraph ”A” above who were not voting ex officio members in any given year shall be con— sidered nonévoting ex officio members. COMMENT: 'It is our belief that this provides an orderly and fair means for apportioning votes among the administrative members of the Senate and avoids any prob- lems that might attend balloting among such a small group of persons. We have strived to balance the rotation process. For example, three Medical Center administrators are among the even numbered group and three in the odd numbered group while the Vice President for Academic Affairs is not in the same group as the Vice President for the Medi- cal Center or the Assistant Vice President for Academic Affairs. Three larger non-medical colleges (the Graduate School, Education and Engineering) are in one group and three are in another (Arts and Sciences, Business and Economics and Agriculture).' I think Brad Canon did a good job of putting this together and since this was delegated to them with approval from the Senate Council, this does not take Senate action. This is how the ex officio voting members will be selected next year. May I remind you and ask you to remind your colleagues that next week is final exam week and there are rules to go by for giving final examinations. We are already getting complaints from both faculty and students in regard to violation. If you know how to enforce the rule, you are a better man than I am. However, I would suggest to you that Senate Rule Section V. 2.4.6 states, with a few exceptions, that finals are to be given only within their designated time frame. That is Monday through Friday of next week. Our end of the semester social will be held a week from tomorrow, December l5, from 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. at the Alumni House. This is the only pay you are going to receive from being on the Senate so you might as well collect when you can. The Committee on Nominations is accepting suggestions for vari— ous committees. We ask you that when you send in nominations to state on the form what committee you are suggesting people for because just showing on there ”John Doe” without suggesting some committee that he or she might be able to work on doesn't do a lot of good. The Ombudsman Search Committee has been appointed. Jim Criswell from Dr. Sears' office is chairman. Professor Massie is the repre— sentative from the Student Affairs Committee. Connie Wilson is the Senate Council representative. Three students-—Peri Jean Kennedy, Vincent Yeh and Katy Banahan-—represent both the Student Association and the Student Affairs Committee with Vincent Yeh being the graduate student from the Student Association and Katy Banahan, undergraduate. Tte graduation list was submitted to the Senate Councii from istrar’s Office. This has been approved subject to everyone . ‘ .ting requirements and has been passed on to the Board of Trustees for action at that meeting tomorrow. Those are the information items I have. The next item is a report from one of our facuTty members on the Board of Trustees, Professor Uiiiiam Wagner. Professor Wagner spoke to the Senate as foiiows: ”The facuity representatives are aTways invited to a meeting at the Councii on Higher Education before the reguiar Councii meets to take up the agenda. I wouid iike to pick out two particuiar items which I consider most important to the University. One is the budget hasnd upon 'mission funding‘ so caiied 'Biuegrass PTan.‘ I guess it shouid be more favorabie to the University than in the past if it doesn't get caught in the poiiticai ‘buzz saw' which I am afraid it might. There was a lot of discussion among the facuity representatives meeting there. The reason the Regionai Universities are quite concerned is that it does favor enroiiments. if we are the fiagship institution, it shouid he to some advantage if thev do recognize our research func— 117-071 . The other one which wiii have a Tot of impact upon this institu- tion is the seIective admissions poiicy which the University wiii be coming up with before too Tong. I shoqu point out it is the responsi— bility of the Senate to come up with the admissions poIicy for the University. I think quite a few peopie say it wouid be fine to have seIective admissions. The iii—prepared student wiTT go eisewhere per- haps and we woqu end up with oniy the best students here which wouid be a joy to teach. On the other hand, I think the CounciT and the Prichard Committee recognize the probiem for the iii—prepared student and some provision has to be made to bring them up to this ievei. One suggestion is that they wouid be brought up to that ieveT per— haps in the Community CoIIeges. Of course, this means additional funding for the Community Coiieges and the question comes up, 'where does that money come from?’ Niii it be additionai funding or wiTi it come out of sombody eTse's budget? Perhaps it wiiI come from U.K.'s budget since the Community CoIIege System is in our budget. I think this wiii pose a reaI probiem on how we are going to finance it. Presum— abiy the Prichard Committee Report says that whatever institution goes to seiective admissions wiTT not be penaiized and that U.K.'s budget wiTI not be decreased but used to fund the graduate and upper division area. Here again I think this couid become a poIiticaT 'hot potato' before it is aTI over. Furthermore, I think some of the Regionai Institutions are quite opposed to this idea, and it begins to make some institutions second-grade institutions unTess they come up with seTective admissions, which some of them are doing. I think this coqu affect our funding sooner or Tater eventhough it might start out that we are not penaiized for seiective admissions. I think it very difficuit for the IegisTators to recognize that we are not funded on the basis on the number of students. One has to be care— fuT for any kind of formuia funding based upon enroiiments. I think this is something the Senate shouId be concerned about when we come up with seiective admissions and what criteria are used. -5- One other item is the one coming up at the Board of Trustees meeting tomorrow concerning the Robinson Forest. I would like to dwell on that a little. The recommendation coming up is that the Board authorize and direct the Chairman to appoint a special committee of the Board charged with evaluating the legal, environ- mental, economic and technical aspects of conducting mining opera— tions in the Robinson Forest and making a policy recommendation to the Board regarding the future use of the Forest, and second that the Administration be instructed to enter into no negotiations with parties interested in mining the Robinson Forest until such time as a Board of Trustees policy has been adopted and announced. The background of this recommendation is deemed appropriate at this time because of two facts. First, the severe budgetary crisis facing the University makes it necessary to take a careful look at those assets of the University which might possibly contri- bute to an alleviation of this severe financial problem. Second, we have begun to receive an increasing number of inquiries from third parties who have expressed interest in mining the property. It is our belief that a clear-cut Board policy should be adopted prior to any discussions concerning the future of Robinson Forest. If any of you have any comments or suggestions you would like to make to Connie or me, we would be glad to receive them before the Board meeting tomorrow or even after the meeting. Thank you." Chairman Kemp thanked Professor Wagner for his remarks. Professor Kemp commented on the selective admissions policy. “I might comment a little further on the selective admissions policy. The President appointed a committee to set forth the over- all plans for this with Vice President Gallaher as Chairman. The Chairman of the Admissions and Academic Standards Committee worked with the members of that committee. They are working on a policy statement and guidelines and then they were supposed to have had it ready by January, but I think it's going to be delayed. Following that the Senate committees that deal with this will have the job of putting together the final admissions standards. I hope this will come before the Senate sometime next semester.” Chairman Kemp rocognized Professor Donald Ivey for a motion from the Senate Council. Professor Ivey, on behalf of the University Senate Council, recommended the establishment of a quorum for the University Senate during the transition time. This proposal was circulated to members of the University Senate under date of November 17, l98l. There was no discussion and the motion which passed unanimously reads as follows: Proposed: Quorum for the University Senate for the transition time: Year Quorum l982-l983 65 1983—1984 55 Rationale: The present quorum is 75 and the l984_l985 quorum as approved by the Senate on October l2 is 45. The figures of 65 and 55 will reduce the quorum in proportion to the reduction in Senate membership. Chairman Kemp rocognized Professor Donald Ivey for a motion from the Senate Council. Professor Ivey, on behalf of the University Senate Council, recommended the proposed re— vision in the University Senate Rules relative to the Double Major, Section 5, 4.4. This proposal was circulated to members of the University Senate under date of November l9, l98l. The floor was opened for questions and discussion. Professor Canon asked if the proposed revision was in effect a substitute for the existing rule. Chairman Kemp res- ponded that it was and that the rule would be put in the regulations as a substitute for the rule that is currently there. There were no further questions, and the motion passed unanimously. The proposal reads as follows: Proposed Revision: A student may obtain a double major by meeting all requirements in two major fields whether these be in the same college or different colleges. If there is a generic relationship, work in one major field may be applicable to the second major field and vice versa. The student must indicate his double major to the office of student records and registration. He must have an advisor in both major fields and must submit two acceptable fields of concentration plan sheets. The student who completes requirements for a double major but for only one degree will receive the appropriate degree and the record will indicate two majors. The student who completes the requirements for two degrees will receive two degrees. Rationale: The Rules specify that a student may obtain a double major by meeting all requirements in two departments. Some departments offer more than one major. An example is the School of Music which offers three degrees: l) Bachelor of Arts in Music 2) Bachelor of Music in Applied Music 3) Bachelor of Music in Music Education This change would allow a student to have a double major within the department. The student would choose his degree (i.e., Bachelor of Music in Applied Music) and stipulate the double major (i.e., with a second major in Music Education.) Note: The proposed revision will be forwarded to the Rules Committee for codification. Chairman Kemp recognized Professor Ivey for the third action item. Professor Ivey, on behalf of the University Senate Council, recommended the proposal Minimum Enrollment in Classes. This proposal was circulated to members of the University Senate under date of November l6, l98l. Professor Ivey split the proposal into two sections. The second section concerned, "If a course is to be dropped, the students who were enrolled should be notified if possible at least three (3) days prior to the last day to enter an organ— ized class during a regular semester and two (2) days prior to the last day to enter an organized class during summer school.“ Many times courses are dropped after add-drop and this leaves students hanging. In the discussion which followed Professor Wiseman asked if there were any legal implications in the rule. Professor Ivey responded that most units would offer the course on an independent study basis. He added that the purpose of the proposal was to try to insist that students would get notification if a course were dropped. He said he didn't know about the legality of the rule. Dean Langston asked if the intent of the second part of the rule was that if courses were to be dropped would they have to be dropped three days prior to the last day to enter an organized class. He added that sometimes the classes were held open until the last minute trying to get enrollment. He said it meant that many of the classes which were taught in the summer would be canceled as of advance registration. Chairman Kemp said the Council did not intend to mean that. He said that the intent was if the classes were canceled, the students would be notified. It was an attempt to let as many students as possible know that the class was not going to be taught. Pro— fessor Gesund wanted to know if “course” meant sections because sometimes there might be a particular section of a course canceled. Professor Ivey responded that most of the time it was the 600 and 700 level courses and there are not sections of these courses. Professor Gesund said that he was very concerned because frequently a section of math or English is suddenly abolished, and it was difficult to juggle a student's schedule around to be able to take another section of a required course. Professor Crabb wanted to know if there was a practical way of notifying students. Professor Kemp said there was no practical way of notifying some students and this was an attempt to do the best possible. At present there are no regulations concerning dropped classes. A Senator did not like to see the rule set in hard concrete. He said there should be a policy to try to follow, but it was difficult to reach students and in the summer many courses do not ”make“ until the first or second class session. Dean Langston said it seemed more rational to him to say that if the class were canceled under the circumstances outlined in the second part of the proposal, the students would be given the opportunity to add a class after the deadline date. Professor Brooks said that it would affect undergraduates as well. He felt the rule would create more problems than it would solve. He supported the intent and felt students do have a problem about classes being dropped, but he wanted to know who was going to notify the students. He felt the proposal should go back to the Senate Council. Professor Gesund moved that the proposal be sent back to the Senate Council. The motion was seconded and passed. Professor Ivey withdrew the first part of the proposal because he felt the intent was very good and was to give administrators the legal authority in writing to say there were not enough students to teach a class. He said it would destroy a lot of graduate programs. Dean Langston asked if the intent were to authorize administrators to cancel classes why didn't the proposal state that? Chairman -8- Kemp said the reason for this was that each year various Deans and Department Chair- men will say to the faculty, “Unless you have this number of students enrolled, the University cannot afford to teach the class.” However, the regulation was not written to give the administrators the authority. This was an attempt to make legal in writing what was already being done. Professor Liddle pointed out that if a student needed a course to graduate, he would teach it on an independent basis and then get complaints that he was teaching a course for one student. He said faculty do that as an overload. He felt if faculty ceased doing that they were going to cease doing a good turn for the students to help them complete their programs. Professor Ivey said that was the reason the proposal was being withdrawn. Professor Olshewsky was worried if the proposal were withdrawn, it took away some norms across the board and make it as variable as Deans might choose to make it. There was no further discussion and the motion passed to withdraw the second part of the proposal. Chairman Kemp said that he would take the prerogative of the Chairman and withdraw the entire proposal. Professor Gesund felt the problem of classes being canceled still existed and said that it would be helpful if something could be done to help the administration. Chair— man Kemp said the Senate Council would take the proposal under consideration and if deemed worthy of further study, would bring a proposal before the Senate. Professor Bostrom said that was not in order and according to action of the Senate the Senate Council would have to act. There was no further business, and the meeting adjourned at 3:45 p.m. Martha M. Ferguson Recording Secretary UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY LEXINGTOV KENTUCKY 40506 UNIVERSITY SENATE COUNCIL IO ADMINISTRATION BUILDING November 16, 1981 Members, University Senate University Senate Council AGENDA ITEM: University Senate Meeting, Monday, December 7, 1981. Proposed minimum enrollment in classes. Proposal: In order for a course to be offered, it must have a minimum number of of students. The following minimum number of students will apply except for experiential education courses, independent study courses and courses for research credit or residence credit. Course Level Regular Semester Summer School 100-299 10' 15 300-499 7 10 500 and above 5 5 Waiver of the above rule will be at the discretion of the dean of the college in which the course is offered. If a course is to be dropped, the students who were enrolled should be notified if possible at least three (3) days prior to the last day to enter an organized class during a regular semester and two (2) days prior to the last day to enter an organized class during summer school. Bationale: This practice already is being followed in some colleges although there is no written authorization to do so. The waiver of the rule is authorized be— cause some required courses and some specialized courses may, at the dis— cretion of the dean, be offered with less than the number noted. The time frame is given so that students will have time to add a course or courses in case a course Note: If approved, the proposal will be sent to the Rules Committee for codification. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY UNIVERSITY UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY LEXINGTo’q KENTUCKY aosoe UNIVERSITY SENATE COUNCIL ' 10 ADMINI:TRATION BUILDING November 17, 1981 Members, University Senate University Senate Council AGENDA ITEM: University Senate Meeting, Monday, December 7, 1981. Establishment of a quorum for the University Senate during the transition time. Proposed: Quorum for the University Senate for the transition time: Year: Quorum 1982-1983 65 1983—1984 55 Rationale: The present quorum is 75 and the 1984—1985 quorum as approved by the Senate on October 12 is 45. The figures of 65 and 55 will reduce the quorum in proportion to the reduction in Senate membership. AN EQUAL OPPORTVJNITY UNIVERSITY UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY LEXING‘C‘N KEN'.-':KY 40506 UvaERSlTV SENAffi COUNCIL 1: ADMLNISTRATION BUILaiNG —. Ivlembers, university Senate University Senate Council AGENDA ITEM: University Senate Meeting, Monday, December 7, 1981. Proposed revision in Senate rules relative to the Double Major, Section V, 4.4. Current Rule: \. . 4. 4 Double Majors in Two Colleges 4. 4.1 A student may earn a single baccalaureate degree with a double major in two different colleges by: a) Designating one of the majors as the princi- pal major. b) Completing the departmental or program re- quirements for the principal major. c) Completing the degree requirements of the college in which the principal major is located. d) Completing the specific departmental require- ments for the second major. These second major requirements shall be delineated by the second de— partment, and approved by the college of the second department, by the Undergraduate Council, and by the University Senate; these requirements may include whatever components of its college de- gree requirements the department considers essen— tial. e) Completing the University General Studies re— quirements. 4. 4. Z The primary responsibility for advising a student in a double major program shall rest with the principal ma- jor department. An advisor from the second department shall provide assistance where necessary. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNlTY UNIVERSIYY Page 2 Senate Avéhda ltem: Double Major Revision, '\'. 4. 4 Novendber 19, 1981 The diploma shall indicate the degree frorr. the college of the principal major. The transcript shall indicate the degree and both majors. Second majors shall not be available in departments which fail to delineate requirements or whose require- ments are not approved as specified in 4. 4.1. 6 above. Proposed Revision: m A student may obtain a double major by meeting all requirements in two major fields whether these be in the same college or different colleges. If there is a generic relationship, work in one major field may be applicable to the second major field and vice versa. The student must indicate his double major to the office of student records and registration. He must have an advisor in both major fields and must submit two acceptable field of con- tration plan sheets. The student who completes requirements for a double major but for only one degree will receive the appropriate degree and the record will indicate two majors. The student who completes the requirements for two degrees will receive two degrees. Rationale: The Rules specify that a student may obtain a double major by meeting all requirements in two departments. Some departments offer more than one major. An example is the School of Music which offers three degrees: 1) Bachelor of Arts in Music 2) Bachelor of Music in Applied Music 3) Bachelor of Music in Music Education This change would allow a student to have a double major within the depart— ment. The student would choose his degree (i.e. , Bachelor of Music in Ap- plied Music) and stipulate the double major (i. e. , with a second major in Music Education). wJ—‘LJ. wwr‘r'r Note: If approved, the proposed revision will be forwarded to the Rules Com- mittee for codification. ' /cet