xt7bk35md26d https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7bk35md26d/data/mets.xml University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate Kentucky University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate 1991-10-14 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 14, 1991 text University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, October 14, 1991 1991 1991-10-14 2020 true xt7bk35md26d section xt7bk35md26d LﬂWVERSHY OF KENTUCKY

LEXINGTON. KENTUCKY 40506-0032

UNIVERSITY SENATE COUNCIL
IO ADMINISTRATION BUILDING

3 October 1991

TO: Members, University Senate

The University Senate will meet in regular session on Mbnday,
October 14, 1991, at 3:00 P.M. in room 115 of the Nursing Building
(CON/HSLC). Note: The Nursing Building is across Rose Street from
the University Hospital and is connnected with the Medical Plaza.
Room 115 is at the north end of the building.

AGENDA:

Minutes: September 16, 1991
Resolutions.

Chair's announcements and remarks—-COSFL Review.

Action Items:

a. Proposed changes in the University Senate Rules, Section IV
— 2.2.1 Admissions to the College of Nursing. (Circulated
under date of 1 October 1991.)

Proposed addition to University Senate Rules, Section V —
3.2 (Undergraduate Colleges—Probation and Suspension
Policiesj. (Circulated under date of I October 1991.)

Proposal to add statement to University Senate Rules
regarding off-campus program offerings. (Circulated under
date 2 October 1991.)

FOR DISCUSSION ONLY: Proposal to add Teaching Portfolio in

Criteria for Promotion and Merit Review Considerations.
(Circulated under date of 2 October.)

Randall Dahl
Secretary, University Senate

If you are unable to attend this meeting, please contact Ms.
Martha Sutton in the Registrar's Office in advance, 7—7155.

AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY UNIVERSITY

MINUTES OF THE UNIVERSITY SENATE, OCTOBER T4, 199]

The University Senate met in regular session at 3:00 p.m., Monday, October
l4, l99l, in Room ll5 of the Nursing Health Sciences Building.

Marcus T. McEllistrem, Chair of the Senate Council, presided.

Memmbers absent were: Robert S. Baker, Bart Baldwin, Harry V. Barnard*,
John J. Bernardo*, Glenn C. Blomquist*, Peter P. Bosomworth, Douglas A. Boyd,
Joseph T. Burch, D. Allan Butterfield, Rutheford B Campbell, Jr.*, Clyde R.
Carpenter, Edward A. Carter, Samuel 0. Castle, Donald B. Clapp, W. Harry
Clarke, Jordan L. Cohen, Georgia C. Collins*, Clifford J. Cremers*, Lenore
Crihfield, Joe T. Davis*, Paul M. Eakin, Bruce S. Eastwood*, Richard Edwards,
Raymond E. Forgue*, Wilbur W. Frye*, Richard W. Furst, Joseph H. Gardner*,
Misha Goetz, Lester Goldstein, Robert D. Guthrie, Lynne A. Hall*, J. John
Harris III, Zafar S. Hasan*, Laurie R. Hatch, Christine Havice*, Robert E.
Hemenway, Brian Hoffman, Micki King Hogue, James G. Hougland, Jr., Richard A.
Jensen*, Adrian Jones*, Angela Knopp, James M. Kuder*, Thomas W. Lester,
Thomas T. Lillich*, C. Oran Little, William C. Lubawy, Bruce A. Lucas, William
E. Lyons, Martin J. McMahon, Jr.*, Karen A. Mingst*, William G. Moody*, Derby
Newman*, Robert C. Noble*, Clayton P. Omvig*, Clayton R. Paul, Deborah E.
Powell*, Thomas C. Robinson, Arturo A. Sandoval, Edward C. Scheiner*, Jim
Shambhu, Andrew Shveda, Robert H. Spedding*, Janet Stith, John S. Thompson*,
Ann R. Tickamyer, Thomas Tucker, Salvatore J. Turco, Enid S. Waldhart*,
Charles T. Wethington*, Eugene R. Williams, Constance P. Wilson*, Emery A.
Wilson, H. David Wilson*, Peter Wong, and Thomas R. Zentall.

The Chair welcomed everyone to the second full meeting of the University
Senate of the Fall Semester. The Chair recognized Professor Charles Haywood,
College of Business and Economics, to present a Memorial Resolution.

MEMORIAL RESOLUTION

Virgil L. Christian, Jr.
T922 - T990

Virgil L. Christian, Jr., was a member of the faculty of the
Department of Economics of the University of Kentucky from l949 until
his death in November l990. During these more than 4l years, he
distinguished himself in teaching, research, and service.

Born in Horse Cave, Kentucky, in l922, Virgil Christian served
with the U.S. Army Air Force as a navigator—bombardier in the
EurOpean theater of operations during World War II. He received the
Bachelor of Arts degree in Economics from the University of Kentucky
in 1947, the Master of Science in Economics in l949, and the Doctor
of Philosophy in Economics in l955. He was thus one of those unusual
persons that a departmental faculty, on rare occasions, elects to
keep for itself.

*Absence explained.

As a teacher, Dr. Christian was held in the highest esteem by
the many students and colleagues he had during his 41 years at the
University of Kentucky. The recollections of his students, including
tales about his absent-mindedness as well as his excellent classroom
presentations, long ago took on the dimensions of legend. That he
taught such arcane subjects as mathematical economics and econmetrics
to wave after wave of graduate students further enhanced his aura as
a teachers' teacher.

As a researcher, Dr. Christian's scholarly contributions
included a wide range of interests. One of his more unusual articles
was a statistical analysis of horse race results, addressed to the
question: "Are Saturday Tracks Really Faster?” The most enduring of
his works is the study he did with Dr. Ray Marshall in the late l9605
on Employment of Blacks in the South.

In university and community service, Dr. Christian is remembered
by many for his work as one of the persons actively involved for a
number of years in the direction of the Central Kentucky Artist and
Lecture Series. In service to the state, he was at various times an
adviser on research to various government agencies, especially the
Public Service Commission.

In the perspective of Dr. Christian's impressive career as a
teacher, scholar, and public servant, it may seem trivial to mention
such things as his avid interest in sports, his membership in K—Men's
Club, and his long-time service as academic advisor of Kappa Sigma
fraternity. But it was "Sonny" Christian's qualities as a real
person that made him a delightful friend as well as a collegial peer,
and it is as that whole person that we shall remember him.

The Chair requested that the resolution be spread upon the minutes and
asked the senators to rise for a moment of silence in honor of Dr. Christian.

The Chair reported that the Senate Minutes for September l6 have been sent
to duplicating but unfortunately they have not been circulated. The approval
of the minutes will be postponed until the November Senate meeting.

The Chair stated that the action items on the agenda also did not reach
the senators ten days prior to the meeting. The Chair entertained a motion to
waive the ten-day circulation requirement for the agenda items. Motion was
moved, and there was no objection. The Chair ruled that the ten-day
circulation requirement would be considered waived.

The Chair made the following remarks:

First, an item that appeared in the Monday memos, concerns the
error which the Herald—Leader made in announcing the President's
salary increase. It was not a Zl percent increase during the last
year. In fact, the President's salary increases by contract of the
Board of Trustees at the average of the rates of salary increases for
faculty and staff each year. During the last two years we have had
l0 percent average increases, and so that compounds to a 2l percent
increase over a two-year period, not in a single year. That was an

error in the Herald—Leader front page table that I wanted to point
out. ‘

I would like to note that Carolyn Bratt noted that the President
has stated that there will be a Faculty Handbook prepared for
distribution to the faculty and students next fall. A special
committee has been appointed to take care of that. Professor Juanita
Fleming, the President's Special Assistant for Academic Affairs,
chairs the committee. The committee members include: Janet DeLacy,
Chris Brown, who is the American Council on Education Fellow this
year in the President's office; Chris Havice, Director of the Honors
Programs and Professor of Art History; and Professor Phyllis Nash,
the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs of the Medical Center. That
committee is looking at a massive, detailed piece of work that Paul
Sears had done prior to leaving, and developing from it a Faculty
Handbook. That should be ready for review by April. Also the
Administrative Regulations for review and evaluation of academic
units are undergoing study for revision. One reason for that is to
see that they can be coordinated with the Strategic Plan, which is a
relatively new idea in unit review, and also to put them in such form
that they can be easily extracted for use at the Council on Higher
Education now that the Council has decided to get into measures of
accountability and effectiveness. Those Administrative Regulations
are being revised by a special administrative committee.

I wanted to make a couple of comments drawn from the Council on
Higher Education's new Strategic Plan which has just been released

which is the ”Strategic Plan for Higher Education in Kentucky from
l99l to l996.” There are several things that are interesting to us.
One is that they have visions which include quality and interinsti-
tutional cooperation. The third element they pushed, from my point
of view, is the fact that technological advances allow us to enhance
instruction in certain ways. Their priorities are this: the higher
education system as a whole has teaching as the system's foremost
responsibility. They also ask that all elements of the higher
education system provide full involvement in the Kentucky Education
Reform Act (KERA). Finally, they have the feeling that enhanced
technologies can aid the collaboration amongst faculties of different
institutions, and enhance interactive distance learning. The CHE
expects to see distance learning pushed in the coming years and they
expect to see enhanced collaboration amongst faculties. For the
University of Kentucky they have the usual special emphasis on this
being the only statewide institution of research, scholarship, and
instruction. They have a special interest in master's, doctoral and
professional programs which can best be provided through cooperative
programming with other universities and the community colleges. You
can see that they are pushing this notion of institutional
cooperation very firmly. Finally, our role in KERA, as they see it,
is completing the basic and applied research to enhance teaching and
learning. These are the thrusts of the Council for the next
five-year period in higher education. I think this is interesting
because they interact well with many things that we have declared to
be of interest internally.

The Chair recognized Professor John Piecoro, Chair-elect of the Senate
Council, to present the first action item on the agenda. Professor Piecoro,
on behalf of the Senate Council, moved approval of the revised agenda item I
which is the proposed changes in the University Senate Rules, Section IV -
2.2.1 Admissions to the College of Nursing. Professor Piecoro pointed out
some changes in the proposal. The first change is in the second paragraph
which reads: ”Applicants must be in a state of good health enabling them to
carry out the functions of the professional nurse.” A second change is that
the number of students at the beginning of the junior year does not exceed l20
which is a change from l40. In item II the second type of student the grade
point average for admission for transfer students has been changed from GPA of
2.50 to 2.35. The group of students in number III is an added group which is,
"Students will be eligible for readmission to the College of Nursing after
suspension from the College when they meet criteria as stated in Section 2 a
and b of this policy.” Professor Piecoro stated that the remainder of the
proposal has to do with other types of students who are transferring or may
have an associate degree. Some of the changes have to do with the pre—
requisite courses that are required and also with the GPA. He stated that in
the rationale the requirement about the state of reasonable mental and
physical health has to do with the ability of the nurse to perform certain
exams and be physically able to do that. As far as lowering the GPA for
transfer students, the College of Nursing faculty has had an opportunity to
work with an increasing number of transfer students and have noted that these
students have performed exceptionally well in their college. The transfer
students have added a diversity and maturity level that enriches and
strengthens the overall class. (The proposal was circulated to members of the
senate under date of l October l99l.)

Professor Piecoro noted that the proposal has been approved by the College
of Nursing, the Senate's Committee on Admissions and Academic Standards, and
the University Senate Council. He stated that since the proposal came from
the Senate Council, no second was required.

The floor was opened for questions. A Senator asked what the rationale
was for reducing the total number of full time equivalents from l40 to l20.
The Chair recognized Professor Kay Robinson, Associate Dean for Instruction,
to respond to the question. Professor Robinson stated that the reason was
because the college had to reduce the student faculty ratio in the clinical
areas because of the increase in community care and therefore the faculty
resources would allow the college to handle a certain number of students. A
Senator asked for an explanation in the rationale for the reduction in the GPA
requirement. Professor Robinson stated that the only one the college is
suggesting is a decrease in the GPA for the transfer student. The reason for
that is because they are adult students that have a maturity level that allows
them to succeed despite the absence of a 2.5 GPA. She added they also have
life experience level that is helpful as well. Professor Piecoro wanted to
know if most of the transfer students have an associate degree in nursing.
Professor Robinson responded that transfer students are those from other
areas.

In a voice vote the proposed changes in admissions to the College of
Nursing unanimously passed and reads as follows:

Proposal:

2.2.l Admission to the College of Nursing:
The College of Nursing enrollment will be composed of four—year
students, associate degree nursing graduates and diploma nursing
school graduates. Admission to the University does not guarantee
admission to the College of Nursing. Preference will be given to
Kentucky residents.

Applicants must be in a state of good health enabling them to
carry out the functions of the professional nurse. Routinely,
each student will be required to obtain a rubella and rubeola
titers, and have an annual tuberculin test or chest x-ray.

Progression to upper division courses is regulated so that the
total number of full time equivalents at the beginning of the
junior year does not exceed l20. Admission criteria for four
types of students are presented below:

l. A freshman student will be admitted to the College of
Nursing (CON) if the student has a high school grade point
average (GPA) of 2.50 or above on a scale of 4.0, and also
meets the criteria for automatic admission to the University
of Kentucky.

A transfer student who is not a registered nurse will be
admitted to the CON after meeting the following requirements:

a. Applicants with less than 24 credit hours must meet the
criteria for entering freshman and have at least a GPA
of 2.35 on all college work attempted as computed by
the Office of Admissions.

Applicants with 24 credit hours or more must have at
least a GPA of 2.35 on all college work attempted as
computed by the Office of Admissions.

Students will be eligible for readmission to the College
of Nursing after suspension from the College when they meet
criteria as stated in Section 2 a and b of this policy.

A student who is eligible to take the examination for
licensure (NCLEX-RN) and who wishes to be considered for
admission to upper division courses in the nursing program
must meet the follow1ng requirements:

a. The applicant must be a graduate of or enrolled in the
final semester of an associate degree nursing program
in a college accredited by one of the six regional
academic accrediting associations, OR the applicant
must be a graduate of or enrolled in the final semester
of a diploma program and have earned a minimum of 60
college credits which include:

English ............... 6 semester credits
Natural Sciences ....... 6 semester credits
Social Sciences ........ 6 semester credits
Humanities ............. 6 semester credits

Nursing* .............. 28 semester credits

*Nursing credits may be earned from regionally accredited
colleges by taking the courses or by taking the ACT-PEP
tests. It is strongly recommended that applicants contact
the Office of Student Services in the College of Nursing
regarding the approved nursing ACT-PEP credits. All nursing
courses taken in associate degree or diploma programs are
considered lower division courses and are not equivalent to
upper division courses in this program.

b. For automatic acceptance, the applicant in this
category must have a cumulative GPA of 2.5 or above on
a scale of 4.0 in all college course work attempted as
computed by the Office of Admissions.

Applicants with a GPA between 2.35 and 2.49 will be
considered for admission on an individual basis. Such
actions are recommended by the Undergraduate Student
Admission and Progression Committee and approved by the
Dean of the College of Nursing.

An applicant admitted in this category must hold a
valid Kentucky license to practice as a registered
nurse prior to beginning the first clinical course.

A student who is a registered nurse and who wishes to be
considered for admission to upper division courses in the
nursing program must meet the follow1ng requirements:

a. The applicant must be a registered nurse licensed to
practice in Kentucky.

The applicant with an Associate Degree in Nursing from
a college accredited by one of the six regional
academic accrediting associations will be automatically
accepted if the applicant has at least a GPA of 2.5 on
a scale of 4.0 on all course work attempted as computed
by the Office of Admissions.

Applicants_with a GPA between 2.35 and 2.49 will be
considered for admission on an individual basis. Such
actions are recommended by the Undergraduate Student
Admission and Progression Committee and approved by the
Dean of the College of Nursing.

The registered nurse who is a graduate of a diploma
program will be automatically accepted for admission
after earning a minimum of 60 college credits which
include:

English ............... 6 semester credits
Natural Sciences ....... 6 semester credits
Social Sciences ........ 6 semester credits
Humanities ............. 6 semester credits
Nursing* .............. 28 semester credits

The applicant must have at least a GPA of 2.5 on a scale of

4.0 on all college course work attempted as computed by the

Office of Admissions, and must have satisfactorily completed
the ACT-PEP tests which establish the nursing credits.

*‘k****

Rationale:

Professional nurses must be able to make decisions in a rapid and
competent manner. This requires that they be in a state of
reasonable mental and physical health. The faculty has added the
provision for requiring "physical and/or other examinations" as
needed while the student is in the program in order to ensure
that safe care is provided for clients in their care.

The CON faculty has had the opportunity to work with an
increasing number of transfer students, including students with
degrees in other fields. They have found that these students
perform exceptionally well in our College and have a diversity
and maturity level that enriches and strengthens the overall
class. These individuals are already proven college students.
Because we value this diversity and maturity, and because of our
experience with working with this type students, we believe that
they can be successful nurses with a lower overall GPA than the
2.5 previously required so long as they perform at a 2.5 level in
certain courses found to highly correlate with success (anatomy,
physiology, microbiology, developmental psychology, etc.)
Lowering the admission GPA to 2.35 provides for the greatest
possible diversity for proven college students.

Registered nurses with GPA's of less than 2.5 should be
considered for admission on an individual basis. There are
individual circumstances that may have prevented them from
performing at a 2.5 level during their initial programs. Those
factors may no longer be present or relevant.

The proposal has been reviewed and approved by the faculty of the
College of Nursing, the Senate's Committee on Admissions and
Academic Standards and the University Senate Council.

Implementation Date: Fall 1992

Note: The proposal will be sent to the Rules Committee for
codification.

The Chair recognized Professor Piecoro for the second action item.
Professor Piecoro, on behalf of the Senate Council, recommended approval of
the proposed addition to University Senate Rules, Section V — 3.2
(Undergraduate Colleges-Probation and Suspen51on Policies). Professor Piecoro
stated that presently undergraduate students in the professional nursing
program are subject to the University's general regulations for undergraduate
students pertaining to scholastic probation, academic suspension and
reinstatement. In addition the College of Nursing would like to include the
proposal as circulated that includes undergraduate program probation, removal
from the undergraduate program probation, undergraduate program suspension and
removal from suspension. (The proposal was circulated to members of the
senate under date of l October 1991.)

Professor Piecoro asked Professor Kay Robinson to comment about the
rationale of the proposed addition. Professor Robinson stated that several
years ago the College of Nursing did an extensive review of the progress of
the students in the college because many of the students did poorly on the
national examination for licensure. The college found during that process
that students who did poorly on the licensure examination often were students
who performed poorly in some of the support courses that are required by the
college, such as anatomy, physiology, and pharmacology. The college believes
that the base which is provided by the support courses that are required by
the college and the nonclinical nursing courses are such that they are
critical for the students while in the program and even after they graduate.
Therefore, the College of Nursing is requesting the change.

Professor Piecoro stated that the proposal has been reviewed, revised, and
approved by the Senate's Committee on Admissions and Academic Standards and is
recommended for approval by the Senate Council, and it requires no second.

The floor was opened for questions. Professor Russell Groves (Architecture)
concurs with the intiative, but he requested that the prooosal be delayed for
implementation until the Fall Semester l992 to correspond with the initial
proposal. He feels it is difficult to initiate proposals in mid—semester.
The Chair stated that the implementation date on the last page would be
changed from Fall l99l to Fall l992.

Professor John Thrailkill (Geology) asked about the Undergraduate Program
Probation A and B. He wanted to know if in the B explanation that stated:
"for any course required in the CON (NUR prefix)," was that specifically only
courses with a NUR prefix. The Chair wanted to know if only courses with the
NUR prefix would be governed by this rule and require a better than a C
grade. Professor Robinson stated that could be a nursing clinical course or a
nursing nonclinical course. She added that A referred to courses such as
anatomy, physiology, chemistry, biology, microbiology that are supportive to
the nursing curriculum. Professor Thrailkill wanted to know if it might be

better to say ”CON with a NUR prefix” instead of putting the ”NUR prefix in
parentheses which made it seem optiona]. Professor Jesse Wei] (Physics)
suggested saying, ”Any required courses with a NUR prefix." The Chair asked
if the Co]]ege of Nursing wou]d be satisfied with the editoria] change.
Professor Robinson accepted the change. Professor Wei] had a question
concerning the period of suspension. He stated that changes had been made in
the criteria for which students wi]] be suspended which are more stringent
than to the genera] student body. On page 2, IV states, ”After the period of
suspension, a student may be reinstated ..... ”, but at no point is it c]ear
whether the period wi]] be that of the norma] ru]e or wi]] there be a
different period of suspension. Professor Piecoro stated that page 2, Item IV
shoqu read, "After the period of regu]ar University suspension ru]es ....... "
Professor Nei] thought that wou]d be better.

A Senator who fee]s there is an ambiguity in item II, B at the bottom of
page ] which reads, "earns at ]east a grade of C in any course required in the
CON (NUR prefix) ........ " and wanted to know if that means in every course or
in at ]east one. Professor Robinson stated that means any course the student
receives a ]ower grade than a C. The Chair stated that ”each” cou]d be used.

In a voice vote the proposa] to change the Probation and Suspension
Po]icies in the Co]]ege of Nursing unanimous]y passed and reads as fo]]ows:

Probation and Academic Suspension Standards
Co]]ege of NurSing:

Undergraduate students in the professiona] nursing program are subject
to the University's genera] regu]ations for undergraduate students
pertaining to scho]astic probation, academic suspension, and
reinstatement. In addition, the fo]]owing standards app]y.

(NOTE: In the statements be]ow, the phrase ”in the Co]]ege of Nursing
(CON)" refers to courses with an NUR prefix that are specific
requirements for the degree of Bache]or of Science in Nursing. The
phrase ”by the con" refers to other courses in the student's approved
academic p]an which do not have the NUR prefix, e.g., ENG, CHE, BIO.)

These standards app]y to a]] undergraduate students un]ess aTternative
action is recommended by the Undergraduate Student Admission and
Progression Committee and approved by the Dean of the Co]]ege of
Nursing.

Undergraduate Program Probation
Regard]ess of academic standing in the University, a student
sha]] be p]aced on probation when the student:

A. earns a semester grade point average (GPA) ]ess than 2.0 in
courses required by the Co]]ege of Nursing, OR,

B. earns a grade ]ess than a C (2.0) for any required courses
with a NUR prefix.

Remova] from Undergraduate Program Probation
A student sha]] be removed from probation when the student:

in the semester following probation earns a semester GPA of
at least 2.0 in courses required by the College of Nursing,
AND

earns at least a grade of C (2.0) in each course required in
the CON with a NUR prefix for which the student previously
earned a grade below C (2.0).

III. Undergraduate Program Suspension
A student shall be suspended from the undergraduate nursing
program when the student:

A. earns less than a semester GPA of 2.0 in courses required by
the CON either at the end of the first probationary period
or in any subsequent semester, OR
For a second time fails to earn a grade of C (2.0) in a
course required in the CON with a NUR prefix, OR
fails to earn a grade of C (2.0) in any two courses required
in the CON with a NUR Prefix, 0R
earns less than a GPA of l.5 in the courses required by the
CON at the end of any semester, except for the first
semester at the University, with a preliminary probationary
period.

Removal from Suspension

After the period of regular University suspension rules, a
student may be reinstated into the CON when the student meets the
requirements for admission.

*****

Background and Rationale:

The College of Nursing faculty has considered changes in its probation
and academic suspension policies in light of an extensive review of
-records from their Undergraduate Admission and Progression Committee,
including grades received by students in academic difficulty and their
ultimate success or failure in the program and on the national
licensure examination.

Probation

The decision to require a C in every course-with a NUR prefix was made
because of the faculty's belief that competence in courses such as
pharmacology and physiology, which carry a NUR prefix, is equally as
important as competence in clinical courses, which currently require a
grade of C. Since content from these nonclinical courses must be
applied in clinical settings, competence at the 70% or greater level
is not unreasonable.

In addition, the faculty believe that students earning less than a
grade of C in any course required by or in the College of Nursing,
need to be carefully monitored. Since all such courses contain

essential content for professional practice, it is believed that the
monitoring that accompanies students on probation in the College will
maximize their chances for success.

Suspension

Based on Nursing's review of student records from several years, the
faculty have found that students who fail any two courses (less than
2.0) often do not complete the curriculum and, if they do, are not
successful in writing the national licensure examination.

The proposal has been reviewed, revised, and approved by the Senate‘s
Committee on Admissions and Academic Standards and is recommended for
approval by the Senate Council.

Implementation Date: Fall, l992

Note: The proposed addition will be sent to the Rules Committee for
codification.

. The Chair recognized Professor Piecoro for the last action item.
Professor Piecoro, on behalf of the Senate Council, recommended approval of
the proposal to add a statement to the University Senate Rules regarding
off-campus program offerings. Professor Piecoro stated that the proposal
which the Senate Council passed at its September 23 meeting reads as follows:

"All newly proposed Off—Campus program offerings and any
major changes in Off-Campus programs prescribed method of
instruction shall be reviewed and approved by the
University Senate.”

Professor Piecoro pointed out that off-campus program reviews would be timely
reviews only for consistency of design with on-campus programs. Secondly,
that the prescribed method of instruction produce programs as prescribed or
specified. Thirdly, that new programs would be reviewed initially for
off-campus offerings. Lastly, review only whole programs, that is degree
programs. Professor Piecoro moved that the proposal be approved and since it
comes from the Senate Council, no second is required. (The proposal was
circulated to members of the University Senate under date of 2 October 1991.)

The floor was opened for questions. A Senator wanted to know if the
proposal referred to all off-campus programs. Professor Piecoro believes it
is for all off-campus programs. The Chair stated that the programs to be
reviewed are those that are initially to be presented for off-campus imple-
mentation. He added that the programs already offered off-campus would not be
reviewed, but any change in the method of instruction in programs already in
existence or any program being offered for the first time off—campus the
University Senate would review. Professor Donald Leigh (Engineering
Mechanics) stated that perhaps the proposal means