xt7jws8hhz9q https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7jws8hhz9q/data/mets.xml University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate Kentucky University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate 1970-10-29  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 29, 1970 text University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, October 29, 1970 1970 1970-10-29 2020 true xt7jws8hhz9q section xt7jws8hhz9q  





. 1 - » . \ z-' ». i .19.» 1 - ;. n u‘.‘ 5?: ‘3: 2‘1"; ’A‘féh‘ll?" “1N? vumm-rqm: " 755?? F'MWM ‘fifl'ig‘rm‘VT”"""“""

October 29, 1970

The University Senate met in Special session at 3:00 p.m., Thursday,
October 29, 1970 in the Court Room of the Law Building. Chairman Plucknett
presided. Members absent: A.D. Albright, Lawrence A. Allen*, Richard L.
Anderson*, Robert Aug*, Charles Auvenshine, Robert A. Baker*, James R.
Barclay*, Charles E. Barnhart, Henry H. Bauer*, Robert A. Beargie, Wendell
E. Berry*, Harold R. Binkley, Richard C. Birkebak*, O.E. Bissmeyer, Jr.*,
Gifford Blyton*, Harry M. Bohannan, Peter P. Bosomworth, Frederick Bollum,
Betty J. Brannan*, Bob Brecht, Thomas D. Brower, Herbert Bruce, Marion A.
Carnes*, Clyde R. Carpenter*, Robert E. Cazden*, David B. Clark*, Lewis
W. Cochran, Carl B. Cone*, William B. Cotter, Alfred L. Crabb, Jr.,
Glenwood L. Creech, M. Ward Crowe*, Marcia A. Dake*, Loretta Denman*,
William H. Dennen, George W. Denemark*, Ronald C. Dillehay, Richard M.
Doughty*, Robert M. Drake, Jr.*, Joseph R. Fordham*, Stuart Forth*, Eugene
B. Gallagher*, Art Gallaher, Jr.*, James L. Gibson*, Charles P. Graves*,
Ward 0. Griffen*, Kenneth J. Guido, Jr.*, John V. Haley*, Jack B. Hall,
Joseph Hamburg, Richard Hanau*, Maurice A. Hatch*, Virgil W. Hays, Charles
F. Haywood*, Jean M. Hayter*, Dorothy Hollingsworth*, Howell Hopson*,

John W. Hutchinson*, Raymon D. Johnson, William S. Jordan, Jr.*, Irving F.
Kanner*, Donald E. Knapp*, James A. Knoblett*, Bruce E. Langlois*, Walter

G. Langlois*, Harold R. Laswell*, Robert Lauderdale, Jr.*, Charles T. Lesshafft*,

Richard S. Levine*, Albert S. Levy, Arthur Lieber*, Mark M. Luckens, Donald
L. Madden*, Paul Mandelstam*, Leslie L. Martin, Gene L. Mason, Ernest P.
McCutcheon*, Marcus T. McEllistrem*, L. Randolph McGee*, William G. Moody*,
Thomas P. Mullaney, John Nelson*, Louis A. Norton, James R. Ogletree*,

Harold F. Parks*, J. W. Patterson*, Robert W. Penman, Curtis Phipps*,

Leonard A. Ravitz*, Lloyd F. Redick, John T. Reeves, John W. Roddick,
Wimberly C. Royster, Robert W. Rudd*, John S. Scarborough*, Rudolph Schrils*,
Robert A. Sedler*, D. Milton Shuffett*, Malcolm R. Siegel, Joe F. Sills*,'
Otis A. Singletary*, Eugene J. Small*, W. T. Smith*, J. B. Stephenson,

Robert Straus*, John P. Strickland, Thomas B. Stroup, Willis A. Sutton, Jr.,
Joseph V. Swintosky, Betty A. Taylor*, Sidney Ulmer, John A. Via*, Harwin L.
Voss*, John N. Walker*, M. Stanley Wall, Charles A. Walton*, Ralph H. Weaver*,
Harry E. Wheeler, Raymond P. White*, A. Wayne Wonderley, Robert G. Zumwinkle.

The Senate granted permission to Jane Brown, Kernel reporter, to attend
and report the meeting.

Dr. Ockerman read the following letter from Mrs. Carl Tatum, widow
of Dr. Carl Tatum, deceased:

September 18, 1970
Dean E. W. Ockerman
Secretary, University Senate
University of Kentucky
Lexington, Kentucky

Dear Dean Ockerman:

Thank you for your letter and for the copy of the Memorial
Resolution read in Carl's memory to the University Senate. This

*Absence explained

 Minutes of Special Meeting of University Senate, October 29, 1970 3031

statement of his colleagues' esteem would have pleased Carl as it
did Susan and me.

/s/ Elsie D. Tatum

The minutes of the meeting of September 14, 1970 were approved as

On behalf of the College of Dentistry Professor Sheldon Rovin read a
resolution on the death of Professor William L. Pogue with the recommendation
that the resolution be spread upon the minutes and a copy sent to his family.
The Senate stood for a moment of silence in respect to Dr. Pogue and in
acceptance of the resolution.


Dr. William L. Pogue, Assistant Professor in the University of
Kentucky College of Dentistry since 1966, was fatally injured in an
automobile accident early Saturday morning, August 1, 1970, at the
age of 44 while returning from active duty in the United States
Army. Dr. Pogue had been in dental education since 1963. Surviving
are his wife, Joy, and a fifteen year old daughter, Beth Ann.

Born in Birmingham, Alabama, Dr. Pogue attended Murray State
University, Murray, Kentucky, and received his D.D.S. and M.S.D.
from the St. Louis University College of Dentistry. He became
Assistant Professor in the Department of Crown and Bridge at
St. Louis University after practicing general dentistry in Murray,
Kentucky, for ten years. "


Undoubtedly, Dr. Pogue's greatest contributions were in the
area of teaching. His relationship with students and his devotion
to their problems and welfare made him one of the best liked and
respected faculty members in the College. He made a particular
effort to treat students as individuals, and his door was always
open without regard to the demands of a rigorous schedule. Besides
directing pre—clinical courses in Fixed Prosthodontics, Dr. Pogue
was a member of the ProfeSSional Conduct Code Committee, the Hospital
Dental Service, and a member of many professional organizations.

An honest and dedicated professional, Dr. Pogue will always be
remembered among students and colleagues for his genuineness and
sincerity in his personal relationships and educationally related


May the Senate accept this resolution in respect for a person
who gave so much to everyone with Whom he came into contact and in
sympathy with his family and friends to whom his presence was especially

The Chairman referred the Senators to the motion which was on the floor
at the time of adjournment of the September 14, 1970 meeting of the Senate
and reported that Dr. Adelstein wished to withdraw that motion if there was
no objection and offer a substitute motion. Following no objection from



- -' z 7’ 2 ‘ v m.- x m». -. 1. ‘ If s 11,9):- vncc'v w :‘..‘.‘;.*;.v.\.\‘.: “1".“ r.?a,’¢;i§verv:m§\‘lfl'-~jkf‘{1“ 2‘11'2Msz-‘etu‘4+4g—ivg-,.,-_*.fl...,..,

Minutes of Special Meeting of University Senate, October 29, 1970

the Senate Dr. Adelstein made the following substitute motion:

I move that the Senate go on record as expressing its gratitude
to President Singletary for his comprehgnsive and candid analysis
of the state of the University.

This motion was unanimously approved.

Dr. Garrett Flickinger, Academic Ombudsman for the University,
addressed the Senate and his remarks follow:

I appreciate this opportunity to appear before you, at least
to let some of you know what I look like. The picture in the
paper was taken a number of years ago. I don't know whether it is
better or worse but I certainly look older now.

I wanted to give you some idea of what I am doing in the job
——a sort of interim report——and what I conceive the position to be.

I really think that it is very much as the term itself implies
——that is, its historical derivation. When you have a community of
approximately 20,000——and we are in that neighborhood, if not
somewhat more——just here in the University are 17,000 students and
approximately 1,500 faculty, and the staff——p1aced under a single
entity, it is very easy for a bureaucraéy to develop. It almost
has to, particularly in this day and age when we want to do everything
by committees. And when a bureaucracy develops, sometimes the
student——this being the largest segment of our population and also
the most transient(he is usually here only four years)——gets lost in
the shuffle. That is, he cannot find his way. He does not know
what the organizational chart is for the various structures. After
all, we have not only the administration but colleges, schools,
departments, and individual professors. And occasionally he gets
lost. It is the job of the Ombudsman, particularly in this relationship,
to be a single individual who understands the organization chart of
the University and can help the student to find out where it is he
should be; to assist him in trying to overcome his problems, his grievance.
It is to find out whether the grievance is, in fact, legitimate, and,
if it is, to see if there is not some way to solve it.

I have had approximately 16 cases since my announced appointment
on the 16th of September. This was a little more than I had
anticipated this early in the stage because it takes time for the
students to become aware of the existence of the position; to
understand what it means. It also took me some time to find an
office. I am happy to say that they finally put my desk together
yesterday. I am now formally installed in Rooms 124 and 125 of
Kastle Hall.

My jurisdiction covers those items in Part II of the booklet
”Student Rights and Responsibilities” which was sent to every
faculty member. You all have copies of this. It is the second part
of it which is within my jurisdiction—~the academic responsibilities
and relationships. “That does not mean, however, that I do not have
close liaison with other groups. I have had approximately seven
cases WhiCh were ggt_within my jurisdiction but the complaints came

 Minutes of Special Meeting of University Senate, October 29, 1970 3033

to me and I was able to send them on to the right person for

the solving of the complaint. When I do that, I ask for a return

so that I can know that things have been accomplished. I am very
happy to say that I have had excellent cooperation. Most of the 16
cases have been resolved, I think to the satisfaction of the student.
He did not always get what he had hoped to get in terms of grade changes
but I think it is more a question of his understanding how the grade
was arrived at with a full explanation on the part of the faculty member.
Sometimes we get a little busy and forget that to a student that grade
may mean a great deal. It doesn't make any difference whether that
grade is a B and he wants an A or whether it is an E and he wants to
pass. Either way it can make a substantial amount of difference.

All the student wants is to be able to feel that there is some means

by which he can find out how it all came about. And it is my job to
try and do that. The faculty has been most cooperative in this and I
really appreciate it. Having read some of the stories from Ombudsmen
elsewhere I had visions of having no friends left in the faculty by the
time my one year term was over—sin terms of the horrible things

they said they had found out about their colleagues. I am happy to say
that I haven't found any yet and I am delighted to be here at this
University. So far, at least, I haven't any problems.

There a£e_some things that occurred to me that I thought I
might ask you to do because it seems to me that the bulk of my business
is going to arise at the end of the term. This is when we get down
to the"nitty gritty” and this is when the problems are going to arise.
So I am asking that you help me by doing what, essentially, ought to
be done in order for me to be_able to tell the student, and to show
the student, how his grade was arrived at. Number one, please
keep grade books; that is, if your grade is based on more than one
item. This makes it possible for me to say that I saw the grade book
and these were the grades that were entered in that grade book and
they add up to such and such a score. I am not going to question your
judgment. That is not my job. Most of you are in disciplines that I
frankly have been out of for so long that I wouldn't even think of at—
tempting to put my judgment over yours.

Secondly, I would suggest that if you don't return the papers
or the quizzes to the students individually, you ought to keep them
for at least one full semester after the grade has been announced.
This means that as to the spring semester you ought to keep them
through the following fall semester because inquiries will arise during
the middle of that semester——the student who finally gets enough nerve
to find out something about it, or finds out where he can go to get
that little extra courage. Don't throw quiz papers away before then.
I had one unfortunate case where the teacher had thrown the quiz papers
away in summer school. That is a little early, particularly when the
quizzes are not turned over to the student. It is not a question
of their being properly graded. It seems to me that the student is
entitled to see his quiz——to see where he went wrong. That is really
a part of the educational process and the student ought to be able to
see where he made his mistakes because this will help his education.
I really think we are using quizzes for educational purposes and not
just to find out grades.

Thirdly, please read and follow the Rules of the University Senate.







 . . . .-. . \ v m... -; . w .c.a.~.~..v.-..»'. «swam»: “Wise”?awkwarswrawuw


g, uflii3034 Minutes of Special Meeting of University Senate, October 29, 1970

Most of those you are concerned with are printed in the back of ”Student ;
Rights and Responsibilities". We have had a number of complaints ¢flw~
in the past and these are the complaints I anticipate will arise around NI
exam time. You are not permitted, individually, to change the time

of your exam. You can only change the time of your exam with the
approval of the dean of your college and the Registrar. Any change
made without that approval is null and void and the student has a
legitimate complaint. So make sure the student is properly tested

at the right time and place. I know that sometimes we do it for the
benefit of alargegroup of students that would like us to change.

If you are so inclined, make sure you have the proper approval. We
have also had a recent complaint about a change of the class place and
hour. Individually, again, I would remind you that you cannot do

this. The Rules 9f_the Senate require that any change in time or

place of a class from that printed in the class schedule must be made i
with the approval of the Dean and the Registrar. So please follow

the rules. You will help me, you will help yourself, and we will get

fewer complaints . 5%

One final word I would like to say is to ask you to remember
that I am not an accuser. I do not accuse you.‘ I merely report to
you that I have had a grievance or complaint from a student about you

h or your classroom or your grading. And it is my job to ask you to

E _ help me investigate that complaint, to get the facts, and it is in—

. teresting that almost invariably the facts match. The problem is
the interpretation of them. As you know, everybody interprets them
in their own light and usually those interpretations can be meshed
to match all the facts. So when I call you, don't think that I am
after you as a prosecutor. I am not. I negotiate. I do not
make final decisions. I make suggestions to you that I think will
best solve the problem. The decison is yours. The student does
have a right to appeal from your decison if it is not satisfactory
to him, but so far, I have had only one possible indication of an
appeal and it was one of those I could not solve.



ii Thank you very much. 3

On behalf of the Senate Council, Dr. Stephen Diachun,secretary, presented
a motion that the University Senate invite the members of the Board of
Trustees and their wives to the Second Annual End—of—Semester Social to
beheld in the Helen G. King Alumni House on Monday, December 21, from 6:00
to 9:00 p.m. The Senate approved this motion. '

l The Chairman statedthatDr. Alan Utz, Chairman of the Purposes Committee
l ‘ of the Self—Study group had asked that he announce that a session on
’ ‘ University purposes will be held Wednesday, November llth at 3:00 p.m.
in the Student Center Theatre so that University professors may contribute
their thinking on the purposes of the University. This session is part
‘ j; of the total study being made by the Committee on Purposes as they carry l
pi i ‘ through with their assignment. This will be an opportunity for faculty
‘ ' members to contribute to this Study and to the University.


The Chairman reminded the Senate that the Rules 9f_the University
Senate require that a calendar be prepared three years in advance and be
adopted by the Senate. He then called on the Secretary of the University
Senate who presented the proposed Law Calendar for the 1972 Fall and the




I w

minutes of Special Meeting of University Senate, October 29, 1970 3035

1973 Spring and Summer terms which had been prepared within the framework
0f guidelines set down by the University Senate. The Senate approved
this calendar which had been circulated to the faculty under date of
September 16, 1970.

August 28, 29
August 30
September 4
September 6

September 11
November 6
Nobember 23—25

December 6
December 7—10
December 11—21
December 21

January 8, 9
January 10
January 17

January 22
March 19—25
March 26

April 27

April 28-May 1
May 2—12

May 12

May 13

May 14

June 11
June 12
June 18

June 25
July 4
July 24


University of Kentucky
College of Law

1972 Fall Semester

Monday & Tuesday — Registration

Wednesday — Class work begins

Monday - Labor Day - Academic Holiday

Wednesday — Last day to enter an organized class for the
Fall Semester

Monday — Last day to drop a course without a grade

Monday — Last day to withdraw from a class before finals

Thursday—Saturday — Thanksgiving Holidays — Academic

Wednesday — Law classes end

Thursday—Sunday — Law examination reading period

Monday—Thursday — Law examination period

Thursday — End of Fall Semester

1973 Spring Semester
Monday & Tuesday - Registration

Wednesday — Class work begins

Wednesday — Last day to enter an organized class for the
Spring Semester

Monday - Last day to drop a course without a grade

Monday-Sunday - Spring vacation

Monday — Last day to withdraw frOm a class before finals

Friday — Law classes end

Saturday—Tuesday — Law examination reading period

Wednesday—Saturday — Law examination period

Saturday — End of Spring Semester

Sunday — Baccalaureate Vesper Services

Monday - 106th Annual Commencement

1973 Summer Session

Monday — Registration

Tuesday — Class work begins

Monday — Last day to enter an organized class for the
Summer Session

Monday — Last day to drop a course without a grade

Wednesday - Independence Day — Academic Holiday

Tuesday — Last day to withdraw from a class before finals

Friday — Law classes end

Saturday—Sunday — Law examination V reading period

Monday—Wednesday — Law examination period

Wednesday — End of Summer Session







 , . N . . t.- ~ g raw“ ; n u": ‘2’“, mung"; '-my»:a‘ani’tl'ar-J'd‘k'fil‘fl!W¥@’?"%‘V'§f€7§’ffifi, . :7 ,p m, , 7 ‘W ffiflfl'va-m-wwwflmm

;“'Efl2 3036 Minutes of Special MEeting of University Senate, October 29, 1970

The Secretary, University Senate, presented a recommendation that
the four—week intersession for the summer 1971 (which had been circulated
to the faculty under date of October 16, 1970) be approved, and recommended
further that registration for the 1971 eight—week summer term be reduced
from two days to one day, making the 1971 Summer Session begin on Tuesday,
June 15, 1971, rather than Monday, June 14th. The Senate approved these
recommendations as presented.

1971 Four—Week Intersession

May 17 Monday - Registration
May 18 Tuesday — Classwork begins
June 11 Friday — End of four—week intersession

1971 Eight—Week Summer Session Calendar

June 15 Tuesday — Registration

June 16 Wednesday — Classwork begins

June 21 Monday — Last day to enter an organized class for the Summer

June 28 Monday — Last day to drop a course without a grade

June 28, 29 Monday & Tuesday — Last days for filing applications for
an August degree in College Dean's Office

3 _ July 5 Monday — Independence Day — Academic Holiday
9 July 28 Wednesday — Last day to withdraw from a class before end of
Summer Session
July 30 Monday — Last day to submit all required documents to

Registrar's Office for admission to the 1971
Fall Semester

l August 11 Wednesday — End of 1971 Summer Session

L g T August 13 Friday - A11 grades due in Registrar's Office by 4:00 p.m.

On behalf of the Senate Council and with its favorable endorsement Dr.
Diachun presented a request for a change in admissions rules for the
College of Law. This proposal had been circulated to the faculty under
date of October 16, 1970. He stated that the Senate Council further
recommended that the implementation of termination of the combined Arts—
Law degree program be effective with the 1971 Spring Semester rather than
the 1970 Fall Semester. The Senate approved the proposed revision in
admission requirements to the College of Law and the 1971 Spring Semester
as the time for implementation of termination of the combined Arts—Law
A ” a. College 9f_£aw} In addition to the general requirements
% for admission to the University, an applicant for admission to

the College of Law must meet the following requirements:

(1) The applicant must have received a bachelor's degree
from an accredited institution.

(2) The applicant must have taken the Law School
Admission Test.

(3) The applicant must have achieved a prelaw grade point
average on 2;; college work attempted and a Law School Ad—
mission Test score which are satisfactory to the Admissions
Committee of the College of Law faculty, as reflected by

Committee approval of his application.


' Nisan.

 Minutes of Special Meeting of University Senate, October 29, 1970

The Admissions Committee considers the prelaw grade record,
the LSAT score, the academic improvement shown in the prelaw
grade record and the applicant's aptitude for law study. For the
entering class in the fall of 1971, the Committee would expect to
approve the admission of applicants who have at least a prelaw
cumulative avg. of 2.9 on a 4.0 scale and_an LSAT score of at least
575. The Committee ordinarily denies admission if the cumulative
grade point average is less than 2.5 and_the LSAT score is less
than 500. Between these levels the Committee evaluates each
application carefully and fully, giving special consideration where
the upper division work in undergraduate study has shown a marked
improvement. Any applicant who believes his application presents
a special case for consideration by the Committee may request a
Committee decision on it.

An applicant without a bachelor's degree who seeks admission
from a combined degree program which will entitle him to the
bachelor's degree before he completes requirements for the J.D.
degree, will be considered for admission provided he began prelaw
study in such a recognized combined degree program on or before
the Spring term of 1971, and provided that there would be special
hardship in expecting completion of the bachelor's degree before
enrollment in the College of Law.

An applicant who has been previously enrolled in another
law school will be admitted only if he is in good standing in
a law school which is a member of the Association of American Law
Schools, if he meets the requirements for beginning students
at the College of Law of the University of Kentucky, and if he has
made an academic average in Law which, had it been made in the College
of Law of the University of Kentucky, would entitle him to continue
his studies here. Only credits earned with a grade of C or
higher will be accepted."

The Chairman spoke to the Senators of the proposed revision of the
Rules 9f_the University Senate which had been circulated to the faculty
under date of October 16, 1970. He stated that the revision was mainly a
reorganization of the Rules, such reorganization not having occurred since
1959. He stated further that most of the changes were editorial but where
substantive changes were proposed, they were described fully in the circulation
and were being presented for Senate action. He emphasized that the revision,
if approved, would be sent in its entirety to all the faculty and that
should there have occurred omissions, such omissions should be brought to
the Senate floor for action. He stated further that the revised document
would not be a perfect one; that there were a number of rules which needed
further study but the Senate Council and Rules Committee felt that a
revised complete document should be in the hands of the faculty before
further study and review takes place. Dr. Plucknett told the Senators that
since he was the one who had been most actively engaged in the revision, he
felt that that he should turn the chair over to the Vice Chairman, Dr.
Sheldon Rovin, in order to free himself for any questions.



Dr. Rovin then called on Dr. Plucknett who presented a motion that the
PrOposal circulated to the faculty under date of October 16, 1970 entitled
"Proposed Revision of the Rules of the University Senate”, be adopted.





 - ‘sx m- \ ~ «x ‘ r: v..- -~.w~.-—.*:.1-.w~m r9.- "xamvaw'ww‘m‘ff"? "M .; ,- ., W 2?? “E"f:flfi'ias‘crtwvwfi-w-u..t.7

Minutes of Special Meeting of University Senate, October 29, 1970

Following discussion and requests for clarification of certain items,

Dr. Michael Adelstein referred to the following statement under Section

I. D. 1, Senate Advisory Committee gn_Student Affairs, which reads:

”. .It may recommend on any matter affeCting the academic relationships

of students with the University on its own initiative to the Senate through
the Senate Council. . .". He stated that he felt concern for the implication
that the inclusion of the word ”academic” implied: that of academic autonomy,
and the removal of the Senate from its role of recommending on disciplinary
procedures which are covered in that part of the Student Code adopted by the
Board of Trustees.

Following discussion Mr. Steve Bright recommended that the sentence be
amended to remove the word ”academic” so that it would read: ”. . .It
may recommend on any matter affecting the relationships of students with
the University on its own initiative to the Senate through the Senate

Council. . .” The Senate approved this amendment.

Dr. Jesse Weil opened discussion of the proposed change in Section III.
B. 2. c. College B: Medicine, without action.

Dr. James H. Wells referred to Section I. D. 1. Senate Advisory Committee

on Student Affairs, which had been amended, and recommended that it be amended
E6 read: ”The Committee shall advise on any matter that it cares to." The
Senate disapproved this proposal.


On call for the question the Senate then approved the proposed revision of
the Rules 9f_the University Senate as circulated to the faculty under date
of October 16, 1970 and amended in this meeting. The revision as amended
and approved reads as follows:



A. Authority
B. Composition and Functions of the Senate

1. Composition

2. Eligibility —— The Senate Rules Committee certifies the
list of faculty eligible for elections; (previously it
ruled when questions arose)

3. Elections —— The faculty of the academic units represented
in the Senate shall determine whether their representatives
shall be elected at large or apportioned among their sub—
units. A nominating ballot is provided. Twice as many
names as there are positions to be filled are placed on
the election ballot, after ascertaining the willingness
of the nominees to serve.

4. Terms, Vacancies and Student Membership —— Faculty
members of the Board of Trustees, if not already
elected members of the Senate, are made voting
members of this Senate.

5. Ex Officio Membership —— provides for the academic
ombudsman, if not an elected member of the Senate to
be a non—voting ex officio member.

6. Meetings —— Seventy—five (75) voting members shall con—
stitute a quorum (previously one—half of the voting
membership was a quorum). Roberts Rules of Order are
adopted. Senate meetings are open to the press unless


 Minutes of Special Meeting of University Senate, October 29, 1970 3039

the Senate declares itself in executive session. Agenda
g!“ items and recommendation for Senate action shall be
3 circulated, when feasible, at least 10 days prior to
Senate meetings except for special meetings where it
may be impractical.
When a document embodying a major policy decision is to be
considered by the University Senate, the Senate Council may, whenever
feasible, first place the document on the agenda of a meeting "for
, . discussion only” and on the agenda of a subsequent meeting of the
Senate ”for action”. When a document is on the floor of the Senate
for discussion only, amendments to the document may be proposed
and discussed but not passed; discussion may be terminated by consent
of the body or by postponing temporarily. In addition, amendments
may be submitted in writing to the Senate Council by any two members
i of the Senate for distribution to the Senators with the agenda of the
meeting at which action is to be taken.

. Whenever possible, amendments or motions relative to agenda

gm!‘ items on the floor of the Senate for action should be presented to the

u presiding officer in writing by the person(s) proposing said amend-
ments or motions prior to the opening of the Senate meeting.

7. Officers

8. Functions of Officers of Senate

9. Functions of the Senate





dncils of the Senate
University Senate Council
(a) Eligibility for Membership
(b) M
(c) Vacancies
(d) Officers —- Description is expanded to the following:
"The officers of the Senate Council shall consist of a
chairman, a chairman-elect and a secretary and shall
be elected by the Council at its first meeting in January.
Their terms shall be for one year or until their replace—
‘ ments are elected. The chairman shall preside at Council
63‘ meetings and shall be responsible for the operation
of the Office of the Senate Council. The chairman—elect
shall assume the duties of the chairman in his absence,
and shall succeed to the office of chairman at the
next regular election, or at any time that office
becomes vacant. The secretary shall keep the minutes of
the Council meetings, and shall present Council recommen—
dations to the University Senate for action.”
(e) Purpose and Functions
2. Graduate Council —— Description, composition and functions
are expanded. It represents no change from present
description and charge embodied in the Governing Regulations,
Rules of the Graduate School and the Graduate School Bulletin.
3. Undergraduate Council —— succession of members is instituted
as follows:
"Council members will serve three-year staggered terms
, expiring on December 31, and shall be ineligible to succeed
7 N themselves until a lapse of one year, except that where
they have served one year or less as a replacement, they
shall be eligible to be elected.”











 - » v' - . .- .. . . a..." u N,»- i <.: \.‘a1.'~avum‘.‘.5?.‘»x-:. m»-www-‘a-urnr-ai-rh'fil‘msmf‘f. 1"! ‘f‘if wwwwr 7"*’§”5“1“*‘"”*'“""~'-'”


:33040 Minutes of Special Meeting of University Senate, October 29, 1970

4. Academic Council for the Medical Center —— Description, '
composition and functions are expanded. This section 65‘
represents current description and practices adopted by g‘
”Second Century" and the Medical Center. g

D. Committees of the Senate

Standing Committees:

1. Rules Committee

2. Library Committee

3. Honors Program Committee 3
Advisory Committees:

1. Senate Advisory Committee on Student Affairs —— a

more detailed charge is includedThe new charge is: 3
”. . .shall advise on any matter brought to it by the

President of the University, Vice President for Student

Affairs, the University Senate or the Senate Council. It !
may recommend on any matter affecting the relationships

of students with the University on its own initiative to ,
the Senate through the Senate Council. It shall report Gm!‘
at least annually to the University