xt78sf2m951z https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt78sf2m951z/data/mets.xml University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate Kentucky University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate 1977-04-11  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, April 11, 1977 text University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, April 11, 1977 1977 1977-04-11 2020 true xt78sf2m951z section xt78sf2m951z .,,,._..,,.. w..,.,._...v-.-.~,...................... ...

. _..,-. . _ ., _, H ”mm p.wmwm-ceewnrwr'ww'wv‘wfi-Mq-u~ . . « --"


The University Senate met in regular session at 3: 00 p.m. , Monday, April
11, 1977, in the Court Room of the Law Building.

Constance P. Wilson, Chairman, presiding

Members absent: Michael E. Adelstein*, Ruth Assell*, Charles E. Barnhart,
Ellen B. Baxter*, Robert P. Belin*, Juris Berzins, Norman F. Billups, Harold
R. Binkley*, A. Edward A. Blackhurst’l‘, Jack C. Blanton, Wilbur C. Blount,
Russell H. Brannon*, Joseph T. Burch, Linda Chen*, Donald B. Clapp, Richard
R. Clayton, Lewis W. Cockran*, Glenn B. Collins, Ronda S. Connaway, Bill
Crosby, Donald P. Cross*, Nancy Daly, Robert J. DeAngelis*, Ronald C. Dillehay,
Herbert N. Drennon, Anthony Eardley, Mike Easley, Bruce S. Eastwood*, W.
W. Ecton*, Calvin B. Ernst*, James E. Funk*, R. Fletcher Gabbard, Art Gallaher,
Claudine Gartner*, Kenneth B. Germain*, Joseph Hamburg, Bobby O. Hardin,
Beth Hicks*, Jeffery Hoeck, Raymond R. Hornback, Alfred S. L. Hu, Eugene
Huff*, Charles W. Hultman*, Steve Ibershaff, Gerald J. Janecek*, Dean Jaros,
Raymon D . Johnson, Margaret W. Jones*, James A. Knoblett*, Theodore A.
Kotchen, Robert A. Kuehne, Thomas P. Lewis, Arthur Lieber*, Samuel Lippincott,
Austin S. Litvak*, Donald L. Madden, Donald R. March, Abby L. Marlatt*, James
R. Marsden*, Levis D. McCullers*, Susan A. McEvoy, Gwen E. Mead, Bill Miracle,
George E. Mitchell, Jacqueline A. Noonan*, Terry Norris, Elbert W. Ockerman*,
James R. Ogletree*, Anne E. Patterson, Bobbie G. Pedigo, Paul M. Pinney,
Anna K. Reed*, Robert W. Rudd*, Patrick J. Sammon*, Stanley R. Saxe, George
W. Schwert, D. Milton Shuffelt, Otis A. Singletary*, A. H. Peter Skelland*,
John T. Smith, Stanford L. Smith, J. Truman Stevens*, Emilie Steinhauer, Marjorie
S. Stewart*, William J. Stober, Harold H. Traurig*, Lester Wahner, Thomas
J. Waldhart, M. Stanley Wall, Richard L. Warren, William G. Winter*, Robert
G. Zumwinkle*

The minutes of the meeting of March 21, 1977, were accepted as circulated
with the correction of the word "Advisory" to "Admissions" at the top of page
15 .


I . Action Items:

Motion to revise the 1977-1978 University Calendar, specifically to change the date
of advance registration (Circulated under date of March 31, 1977).
Motion passed

Motion to amend Senate Rules, IV, 2. 12, Admission tgAdvanced Standing, specifi-
cally concerning the ”67 hour " rule.
Motion passed



*Absence explained





Minutes of the University Senate, April 11, 1977 - Cont

II. Senate Council Activities and Informational Items

A . The Ombudsman Committee Report

B. The Committee on Academic Structure Toxicology Program “a

C Word of Appreciation to Chairmen and Members of Committees of Senate . ‘

D. Harry Snyder, Executive Director of the Council on Public Higher Education:
Address AAUP

E. Senate Election

F . Senate Office - Open During Summer

HI. Academic Ombudsman's Report: Dr. C. Frank Buck, Professor, College of

Professor Wilson summarized Senate Council activities and informational items as

1. The Ombudsman Committee should have a report ready for the President by
April 15. If you have any last minute thoughts, please forward them to
Professor Ogletree.

2. The Committee on Academic Structure has approved the Toxicology Program
as a Center, and it will be discussed by the Senate Council at the next meeting
and probably Will be on the agenda for May 2.

3. Professor Wilson thanked all the Chairmen and members of Committees who
have worked so hard on items to be given to the Senate.

4. Harry Snyder, Executive Director of the Council on Public Higher Education,
is coming to the University to address the AAUP on Wednesday, April 13.

5 . Professor Wilson urged the Senators to get their ballots in and to take part
in the Senate Election . m

6 . Professor Wilson will be in the Senate Office this summer and welcomes any
suggestions, ideas, or gripes. She invited the Senators to come by and visit.

Professor Wilson recognized Professor Paul Oberst. On behalf of the Senate Council
Professor Oberst presented a motion to adopt the proposal to revise the 1977-78
University Calendar. This was circulated to members of the University Senate under
date of March 31, 1977, and reads as follows:

According to University Senate Rules, "An adopted calendar
can be changed only by action of the University Senate. "
(Section II, 1 . 3)

In accordance with those Rules, the Registrar's Office has
requested, and the Senate Council has approved for recommen- '
dation to the University Senate, the following changes in the

 ‘1‘ 1.51
, t

. ........- magnum-"W". . ......... w ,,. “Hanna‘s-7w trI'v‘;',~"""',"?’""‘"~“N"M‘" "


Minutes of the University Senate, April 11, 1977 5047
1977~78 University Calendar which was approved by the Univer-
sity Senate Council on June 5, 1974 and subsequently circulated

to the University Senate for approval:

Advance Registration Dates:


From: Fall, 1977 November 9-22
Spring, 1978 April 10-21

T2: Fall, 1977 November 7-16
Spring, 1978 April 10—19

Note: This proposal decreases the number of advance registration
days from 10 to 8.

The floor was opened for discussion and questions.
Professor Weil wanted to know why the change was being offered.

Professor Wilson said that the change was being made because the approved
calendar had a tenday advance registration period, and the Registrar's Office
had requested the shortening of the advance registration period from ten to eight
days. This change requires Senate action.

Associate Registrar Dexter said that in the Fall of 1976 the eight days of
advance registration caused no procedural problems . When the terrday period
was approved, we were under an old system of registration. In the last three
years the registration system has been improved and physically it does not take
as long to get students registered.

Dean Denemark said that his concern for the change related to the evening
student or those commuting to the campus for one class. These students may
not have enough time to complete the registration process, and one solution might
be to extend the office hours in the Registrar's Office, the Graduate School, and
the advisors’ offices.

Student Senator Wade said that students felt it cut down on the time to be
advised. He suggested that the time for registration be eight days but that advisors
be available a week before advance registration.

Associate Registrar Dexter made a point for clarification. Many people tie
in the advising process with registration. They are related, but the registration
process takes only about ten minutes. The evening class students are advance
registering. All registration forms are accumulated in the academic units and
forwarded to the Registrar's Office. If individual units wanted to meet the studentsl
demands, the time flexibility is there.

Dean Royster said that much of the difficulty in the Graduate School is with
those people attending late afternoon classes but who are not evening students.
It does diminish the time a student can see an advisor.



Minutes of the University Senate, April 11, 1977 - Cont
There was no further discussion, and the motion carried.

The final item on the agenda concerning the "67 hour" rule did not have
the required ten-day circulation.

Motion was made to suspend the tenday circulation rule to take up» the
proposal, and the motion passed.

Professor Wilson recognized Professor Paul Oberst. On behalf of the Senate
Council Professor Oberst presented a motion to adopt the proposed revision
in the University Senate Rules (IV, 2.12) Admission tgAdvanced Standing,
specifically concerning the "67 hour" rule. The proposal reads as follows:


2. 12 Admission t2 Advanced Standing


(l) Admission g University 9f Kentucky Community College Students
Grades, credits, quality points and academic status from courses
taken in a University of Kentucky Community College shall be
transferred when the Community college student enrolls in the
University System. No more than 67 hours may be counted towards
a baccalaureate degree] The applicability of any given courses
not offered in the University System towards a University degree
shall be determined by the Dean of the College in which the student

Note: The sentence in brackets is to be deleted.
Student Senator Wade seconded the motion.

Professor Wilson said that the Senate Council was requesting the Senate
to eliminate the one sentence so that the Catalog, Student Code, Faculty Code
and other publications that carry the rule would be legal. The Legislature
has already passed a law that makes it illegal.

Professor Plucknett said that he did not see the conflict. He thought Community
College hours were already University accepted hours.

Professor Wilson said that the intent of the Legislature was that all hours
can or may be counted toward the baccalaureate degree, not just 67 hours.

Professor Diachun asked if we were changing it because we think it needs
to be changed or to conform with the Legislature .

Professor Sears recommended that the Senate approve the change.

Professor Weil pointed out that the simple deletion would be doing more
than the Legislature had ordered. The Legislature‘s wording is all lower division
academic courses offered by Community Colleges shall be transferable. That
would not be all the courses offered at a Community College.


at] l9


 k n._.. '.. _ t":”*‘ . u," ”mm”. .. ,,-wumn.5m”,_wvwnp~y~~5~~5-~ ... Hm». -.n-.«- ”ppm ....V _ m. >~u -...... .....

Minutes of the University Senate, April 11, 1977 5049

Professor Sears said that all courses are transferable with grades and credits
within the University. It is the rule that courses, credits, and quality points
that satisfy degree requirments will be determined by the Dean of the College
in which the student is enrolled.

Professor Wilson pointed out that the Committee on Academic Standards and ;
Admissions is working on revised wording of the rule in order to clarify the t

Student Senator Benson moved the previous question.

The motion carried.

The vote on the original motion to delete the sentence, "No more than 67
hours may be counted towards a baccalaureate degree, " carried.

The Chairman recognized Professor C. Frank Buck, the Academic Ombudsman,
who presented the following annual report: i :

”Let me express appreciation—-not only for myself, but for the Univer-
sity--to my six predecessors for performing the duties of Academic
Ombudsman in a manner which has brought respect and cooperation to
this office. I have found the Ombudsman receives the assistance needed ‘ i
from the administration, faculty, and students.

The Academic Ombudsman is concerned with all violations of academic
rules between students, faculty, and administration; especially, if rights
have been willfully ignored or violated. This concern is the same whether
it is undergraduate, graduate, or professional. I have found that each 9
group is approximately equal in defending their rights. .

The independence of the Ombudsman's office is respected and supported 5
in the University, particularly by President Singletary and all other ‘
University administration. All actions of the office are based solely on
judgment of fairness and equity by the Ombudsman. The office is impartial
in all disputes. It is not an advocate for any party; but after investiga-
tion, it often suggests and supports settlements. A11 contacts and
communications with the Ombudsman’s office are completely confidential
and so are the records. The office does not use a complainant's name in
investigating a complaint unless consent is given. Although the
Ombudsman's office proceeds differently in various cases, it has a general 1'
procedure which seeks to guarantee fairness to all parties, reconcile
differences, and eliminate problems leading to the complaints. The steps
in the procedure are: (1) Listen to the complaint; (2) Investigate the
facts; (3) Seek participation from all parties concerned; (4) Supervise
the settlement; and (5) Review the case in order to eliminate the
causes . This makes the University a more effective and just institution
for its entire community.







Minutes of the University Senate, April 11, 1977 - Cont 5050
The Student Rights and Responsibilities are very helpful in giving

the "Correct Code of Conduct. " However, many people interpret this as

though it is a "loveless code. " They are so concerned in defining and keep— ,
ing to the letter of the code that they totally ignore the spirit of the code A j
and its underlying principles. We cannot really move to deal with stu-

dents' problems if we are bound too strictly to a code of rules. Neither do

I agree that a "codeless love" is the answer. Just or unjust complaints

against student rights must be dealt with by the Academic Ombudsman--

and with special care regarding the individual. People afiimportant.

The complaints this year are a repetition of complaints experienced
by the past six Ombudsmen. This year the office has received 268 academic
complaints of which 168 cases required detailed work. My judgment is that
150 of the 168 cases were resolved to the best‘interest of all the people in-
volved; 4 cases were unresolved or pending solution. The 168 cases were
from the following colleges: Allied Health Professions - 4, Architecture - 2,
Arts and Sciences - 81, Business and Economics - 7, Communications - 6, .
Dentistry - 2, Education - 18, Engineering - 4, Evening Class Program - 2, fl?!
Fine Arts - 3, Home Economics — 6, Honors Program - 3, Law — 4, Library
Science - 3, Medicine — 2, Nursing - 3, Pharmacy - 5, Social Professions ~ 3,
and Graduate School - 6. With pride, I call your attention to the fact that
this office has not had a complaint this year against the College of Agricul-
ture; the only college in this category. I also want to give a departmental
breakdown for the 81 cases in the College of Arts and Sciences. They are
as follows: Anthropology - 1, Biological Sciences - 8, Chemistry - 8,
Classical Languages - 2, Computer Science - 3, English -— 8, French - 2,
Geography - 1, Geology - 4, German - 2, History - 7, Mathematics - 10,
Military Science - 2, Physics and Atronomy - 5, Political Science - 5,
Psychology - 6, Sociology - 1, and Statistics - 6. This puts the above
statistics in perspective, since many departments in Arts and Sciences have
a larger teaching load than some colleges. There were many departments in
the College of Arts and Sciences free of complaints.

The 168 cases fell into three basic areas: complaints against teaching, fl
complaints which hamper learning, and complaints against administrating
rules. A further breakdown of the 168 cases is as follows: grades — 48,
teaching faults - 30, drop-add — 16, cheating - 5, plagiarism - 3, and
miscellaneous administration _ 66.

The greatest concern of this office is to improve the quality of teaching
and learning at the University of Kentucky and retain a personal concern.
The University of Kentucky Biennial Report 1967-1969 addressing
"Teaching: The First Function: said it best, ”. . .considered the primary
role, it would be teaching. And, at the heart of the teaching function lies
the student, not just the student body but the individual student, each
with separate needs and separate goals. " When addressing "The Faculty",
the report stated, "Although scholarly research goes hand in hand with
effective teaching, the primary responsibility of the University's faculty - fl
as of the University itself — is to teach and to teach well. " I like this.

 ..,..,,... ._......_ _ _ mm»»m mn-r— -nrumnM-mmz-r—W—rf?"”“”'7'f‘fmv - - '4 "’ " “"’ ‘ """“

Minutes of the University Senate, April 11, 1977 5051


If this were totally true, it would leave only one major function of the
Academic Ombudsman: a person to listen. Maybe , this is the students'
greatest need. With these concerns in mind, we have proposed a new
Senate Study Committee on Academic Ethics and Responsibilities. We
have hopes that this committee can address itself to all facets of quality
teaching and learning, especially in two areas: academic cheating and
its ramifications—-whether faculty or student; and the training and
supervision of the TA to insure high quality teaching and learning. Our
recommendations are simplistic in conception, but difficult in adher-
ence. Nevertheless , they have the following objectives: (1) Strive for
quality teaching University wide; (2) Implement an even better intellec-
tual learning situation at the University of Kentucky; (3) Be aware of
the administration‘s role to provide a favorable supporting role for
quality teaching and learning; (4) Implement a comprehensive program
to improve teaching by TA's; and (5) Study ways and means that

could prevent or discourage cheating and plagiarism.

This year has been most enjoyable in that we have been able to help
others. Problems were solved; frustrations were alleviated; and con-
flicts were resolved. In short, there are people in this academic community
today whose lives have been improved because of the existence of the
Office of the Academic Ombudsman. The work has been demanding--and at
times trying-~but, it has also been rewarding. The success of the office
is due largely to the support of the University Administration; and to the
professional work of my Administrative Secretary, Frankie Garrison.

I have found the University to be an exciting, healthy, and basically
sound academic community. Once again, I am appreciative for the oppor-
tunities of the past year. "

The Senate gave Professor Buck an ovation, and the Senate Chairman thanked
for all his work this past year.

The next meeting of the Senate will be May 2.

The Chairman declared the meeting adjourned at 3: 55 p.m.

Martha M . Ferguson
Recording Secretary




March 31, 1977


The University Senate will meet in regular session
at 3:00 p. m. on Monday, April 11, 1977 in the Court
Room of the Law Building.

1) Approval of the Minutes of the March 21 meeting.

2) Information Items and a Summary of Senate Council

Action Items:

a) Consideration of the proposal to revise the 1977—
1979 University Calendar, specifically to change the
dates for pre—registration. (Circulated under date
of March 31, 1977)

b) Proposed revision in the University Senate Rules
(IV, 2.12) Admission to Advanced Standing, Specifical—
1y concerning the ”67 hourH rule. (To be circulated)


c) Ombudsman's Report: Dr. Frank Buck.


Elbert W. Ockerman