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