xt7np55dg228 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7np55dg228/data/mets.xml University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate Kentucky University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate 1994-04-11 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, 1994 text University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, April 11, 1994 1994 1994-04-11 2020 true xt7np55dg228 section xt7np55dg228 LNHVERSHY OF KENTUCKY

LEXINGTON. KENTUCKY 40506-0032

UNIVERSITV SENATE COUNCIL
IO ADMINISTRATION BUILDING

T0:

AGENDA:
1.

4 ApriI 1994 V

Members, University Senate

The University Senate wiII meet in reguIar session on Monday,

Wat 3:00 PM in room 115 of the Nursing BuiIding
CON/HSLC).

Minutes

Chair's Announcements

Resqutions

President CharIes T. Methington, Jr.: Budget Address

Action Items

ProposaI to amend University Senate RuIes, Section V -
5.4.2, Commencement Honors (circuIated under date of 23
March 1994).

ProposaI to amend University Senate RuIes, Section V -
5.3.1.1, Repeat Option. (CircuIated under date of 13 March
1994.)

Proposed poIicy for extending the probationary period for
facuIty. (CircuIated under date of 31 March 1994.)

Randa11 Dah1
Secretary

AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY UNIVERSITY

MINUTES OF THE UNIVERSITY SENATE, APRIL 1 1, 1994

The University Senate met in regular session at 3:00 pm, Monday, April 11, 1994 in Room 1 15 of the
Nursing Health Sciences Building.

Professor Daniel L. Fulks, Chairperson of the Senate Council, presided.

Members absent were: Debra Aaron*, Reginald J. Alston, James L. Applegate*, Stephanie Atcher, John R.
Ballantine*, Mark C. Berger, Antimony Bishop, Rick Boland, Douglas A. Boyd, Joseph T. Burch, D. Allan
Butterﬁeld, Bradley C. Canon*, Ben W. Carr, Edward A. Carter, Shea Chaney*, G.L. Monty Chappell*, Louis
C. Chow, Donald B. Clapp, Jane Clark, Jordan L. Cohen, Darby Cole, Georgia C. Collins*, Delwood Collins,
Michael P. Connors, Melissa Cox, Nancy Custer*, Clarence Robert Dowdy, Richard Edwards, Joseph L. Fink,
Juanita W. Fleming“, Donald T. Frazier, Michael B. Freeman*, Richard W. Furst, Joseph H. Gardner, Lorraine
Garkovich, William Gibson, Lori Gonzalez*, William S. Griffith*, Lynne A. Hall*, J. John Harris III, Zafar S.
Hasan*, Christine Havice, Robert E. Hemenway, James Hertog*, Edward J. Kasarskis, James Knoblett, Kenneth
K. Kubota, Thomas W. Lester, C. Oran Little, Martin J. McMahan, Sandra Miller, David Mohney*, James S.
Mosbey, Anthony L. Newberry, Judith Page*, Barbara Phillips, Rhoda—Gale Pollack*, Thomas C. Robinson,
Ellen B. Rosenman, Daniel Rowland, Edgar L. Sagan*, David Shipley, Thomas J. Stipanowich, William J.
Stober*, David H. Stockham, Michael Stover, Amy Sullivan, Phillip A. Tibbs*, Miroslaw Truszczynski,
Salvatore J. Turco, Mary Walker, Greg T. Watkins, Chris Webb, Lora Weck, Brent White, Eugene R. Williams
Emery A. Wilson, H. David Wilson.

Chairman Fulks thanked everyone for coming to the meeting.

Chairman Fulks stated that he would be turning the meeting over to President Charles Wethington, but ﬁrst
he wanted to say that the President had been terriﬁc to work with this year, he had been very cooperative, his
door had always been open, and they had comrhunicated very well. He then turned the meeting over to President
Wethington who made the following remarks:

First, I would like to return the compliment, Dan Fulks has been, as the Senate Leader,
easy to work with during the year, they had discussed issues, concerns, and matters that impact
the University. He has been always willing and able and presents well the opinions of the
faculty in the discussions with the Administration and others. He thanked Professor Fulks for
the leadership he had provided. (Professor Fulks was given a round of applause.)

I also want to thank Peter Bosomworth for the leadership he has provided and continues
to provide. As you all know Peter is anticipating making a change in assignment July 1, 1994.
Let me express my appreciation and thanks to you for providing strong and effective leadership
for the Medical Center and the entire University which you represent very well. (Dr.
Bosomworth was given a round of applause.)

I came today to talk about the budget and since we don't have one, the remarks will be
very short.

* Absence Explained

JUL 28 1994

Minutes, University Senate, April ll, 1994

Seriously, I will give you a bit of the situation and the background and then avoid talking
very much about what I think the future might hold. It is that the process is not yet ﬁnished and
it probably is a time when we need to be following it closely, but not trying to predict what the
outcome will be. It is a situation that, based on what the Governor has stated publicly, I do
anticipate that he will follow through on his commitment and veto the budget bill this week. I
think the calendar requires that the veto be done no later than Wednesday. It is my anticipation
that the Governor will follow up on his public commitment and veto the budget bill. That, of
course, is likely to be followed by a special session of some kind to address the budget and to
insure that we have a budget for the Commonwealth beginning July 1, 1994.

As a result of this period of indecision, we are not able to move ahead with budget
decisions inside the University of Kentucky; Budget decisions which affect the operating
budget. Working with the Chancellors and vice-presidents and my staff we have been moving
along in anticipation that the state appropriation would increase by two percent in 1994-95 and
three percent in 1995-96 and that the appropriation in 1995-96 would require us to meet certain
performance standards as recommended by the Governor's Higher Education Commission and
adopted by the General Assembly. We are in a situation now where we must put everything on
hold. Final decisions about our operating budget must be put on hold until we know what is
going to happen with the General Assembly and the Governor this week and possibly what is
going to happen in the special session to follow.

It is my guess that Friday we will see the Health Care Bill addressed again. On the radio
this afternoon I did hear that the Governor had decided that he was going to be supportive of
House Bill 250, the Health Care Reform Bill and urge itspassage on Friday of this week. It is
likely that we will see the House suspend its rules and address House Bill 250, with then the
good possibility that the so called Health Care Reform Bill will pass. At least there will be an
effort made to pass it in the House on Friday of this week.

If in fact the budget is vetoed, and the House sustains the Governor's veto, the Governor,
I'm convinced, will call a special session in the near future to address the matter of a budget for
the Commonwealth. If that happens we have then an opportunity to address capital projects
again. The Governor is interested in addressing capital projects again, as is the House, as are,
I'm convinced, certain members in both the House and the Senate. We have an opportunity
then, if the budget is vetoed, and the veto is sustained, to address our primary capital needs and
capital priorities for the next two years. As you know, the library project on which we worked
so long and hard for, the Mechanical Engineering project, certain Community College projects,
certain Agriculture projects, all of these are removed from the present version of the budget
which has passed both the House and the Senate. Virtually every capital project, renovation or
otherwise, has been stripped from the budget at this point. I know that there is considerable
interest by the Governor, by the House, and by the Senate in addressing certain capital
construction priority needs for the state in the next two years. My hope is that if the Governor
does veto the budget that the veto will be sustained, that there will be a special session, that
certain capital construction projects will be addressed and that our principal and our primary

Minutes, University Senate, April 11, 1994

capital construction priorities will be addressed in the special session. In other words, the
opportunity is still there, I believe, for us to take another shot at what we think are our primary
needs for the University of Kentucky in the next two years.

I would anticipate that the other parts of the budget will likely remain unchanged. I do
not see any effort to try to make major changes in the operating budget recommendations of the
Governor as approved by the General Assembly. That is about the only report I can give you
today. After the long process from January up until now we still are in a situation whereby the
budget for the Commonwealth, the state appropriation for the University of Kentucky, has not
been determined ﬁnally for the next two years. Until we have that ﬁnal action by the General
Assembly and the Governor we can not move ahead as we would like to be able to move ahead.
It may mean that whatever we are able to do in the way of salary increases will not be
determined by the end of the semester. All of that depends on how quickly the special session is
scheduled and how expeditiously the House and Senate are able to move through a special
session. I don't want to alarm you unnecessarily, but I want to alert you to the possibility that,
depending upon the special session and the timing of the special session, we may not be able to
make budget decisions and might not be able to know what we are able to do in the way of
salaries by the end of the this Spring Semester. Obviously my desire would be to try to get to
that done prior to having people leave at the end of the Spring Semester for the summer.

Whatever happens in this budget process in the next few weeks, I want all of you to know
that, in my opinion neither the library or any capital project that the University of Kentucky has
put forth is looked at negatively by those leaders in both the executive and legislative branches
with whom I have worked. There is strong support for this Commonwealth Library, there is
strong support for our Engineering initiative, our Agriculture initiatives, our Community
College initiatives. But of course we are caught up in the issue of capital construction
generally. Just how much and where it will be built and whether the projects will be those
determined by the House, determined by the Senate, or determined by the Executive Branch. I
want you to know what we will build this Commonwealth Library and in my opinion the next
time that capital construction is approved in the Commonwealth, whether it be this week, next
week, or at some later date, then I believe our chances our excellent in getting approval for that
project and other projects which we have, since these are well documented, the need is
determined, and there is strong support both in the executive and legislative branches for that
which we are about.

Clearly this year has been in many respects a challenging one for all of us. Challenging in
a number of ways. First, the Governor's higher education commission which was established in
1993, which lead to performance based funding, which lead to some program elimination, which
lead to a reﬁnement of the missions of the Institution, was something we had to do. It was
something we had to do to avoid further budget cuts. I would do it all over again as I have
expressed to you before. It did not of course lead tc a process which would have been the one
that you would have most preferred, or at least some of you would most have preferred, in that
it made it extremely difﬁcult to get the kind of advice, input, discussion into matters such as I

Minutes, University Senate, April 11. 1994

would have liked to have seen and I know many of you would have liked to have seen. Clearly
as a part of that process our Dental School was under attack.

During this year the operating budget of the University of Kentucky supported by state
funds went up one percent. We have had a difﬁcult budget year. As all of you well know, we
are dealing with what has been some rather severe damage to this campus as a result of
inclement weather we had during the winter. So whether it be damage to our trees, damaged to
our shrubs, damage to our infra structure; our roads, our parking lots, our sidewalks we have
had damage done during this year which has been rather difﬁcult for us to correct all at once.
With this year we have successfully managed these issues, in my opinion. Thanks in large part
to you, I think we have successfully managed this year. Because the faculty and staff of this
University, your hard work, your dedication, your willingness to go the extra mile have caused
us to be able to, generate the kind of support that I need and that we need to take on some of
these major issues and concerns.

We have, I believe, resolved the Dental School issue at least for the next two years. We
have come up with an arrangement there that I believe can work. We have dodged further
budget cuts. A one percent budget increase is certame better than a decrease, and a two and
three percent increase for the next two years, if we are successful in that, is a start back in the
right direction. By no means what this institution needs in order to carry out its mission, but it is
a start back in the right direction.

In this year there are I think are some indications of the fact that you and we together have
successfully managed to handle some challenges that have been put before us and we have seen
some successes. We continue to be listed, Jim Applcgate reminded me this morning, as a
Carnegie One Research Institution, in the latest rankings that came out. All the signs point to
the fact that we will have a better academic quality freshman class in the Fall of 1994 than we
have ever had before. As you know 1993 was the best that we had. There continues to be a
very strong student demand placed on this institution and a demand by a better and better
academic quality student every year. Our Graduate and Professional Schools, several of them,
have been singled out for successful ratings or rankings by one organization or another during
this past year.

In short, the qualitative aspects of this institution that I most want to see and I know you
most want to see continue to progress. We are seeing progress in regard to many of those
indicators of quality. If we can see those kinds of measures improve during very tough budget
times, when times get to be better ﬁnancially we should really see some progress. I am really
very pleased with what you and what we have been able to accomplish during a time when we
could have very well have folded up our tents and said we cannot do anything else until times
get better. We haven't done that and you haven't done that. You have been willing to take on
whatever serious academic and other issues that have faced us and I think we have
demonstrated to ourselves and to our publics that we can take on these major issues that impact
higher education in this state and in this nation and that we can handle them successfully,

Minutes, University Senate, April 11, 1994

reasonably, with accountability, with responsibility. Without that kind of attitude on the part of
the faculty of this institution we would not be making the progress that we are making. We
would be using all of our time to be divisive and to argue over issues and concerns and we

would not have been making the sort of progress that I think we have been making in 1993 and
1994.

In short, I want to thank you, the faculty of the University of Kentucky for what you have
done and what you continue to do. I want you to know that I understand very well the
difficulties that you have faced during 1993-94 and assure you that if you are somewhat of an
optimist as I am that you will believe and do believe that there will be better times down the
road and that your efforts don't go unrecognized either inside or outside this institution. What
we would, of course, like to see is to have those efforts recognized by some better level of
funding for the state part of our budget from the state. Those areas in which we have some
control whether it be the hospital or athletics or federal contracts and grants; to whatever extent
we are dealing with parts of the University over which we have some control of the ﬁnances,
then we are showing good progress, we are making headway, we are bringing in more dollars to
try to keep this institution aﬂoat. You are doing that very very successfully.

As a last point let me say that I hope you will remember my feelings about this institution
and I hope that they are shared by you. That this should be the principal statewide institution in
the Commonwealth. That it is the principal institution for research purposes and it should be
and will continue to be and we will develop it as that. That as a priority we have set for
ourselves to bring up of the level of excellence of the teaching function in this institution to the
point that we feel as comfortable with it as we do with the research success we have had. As a
part of that we are focusing on undergraduate, especially freshman and sophomore level
instruction and are bringing it to a level of excellence that will make all of us feel very
comfortable. That we are continuing our efforts in every way we can to insure that we have
computing and information technology that keeps us on the cutting edge and in the forefront of
education and research. Computing technology that serves our faculty, our staff, and our
students and keeps this institution out in the forefront. That we continue to make strong efforts
toward making this a culturally diverse institution. To focus on issues that impact minorities
and women. To continue to make progress every year in creating the kind of climate in the
institution that all of us would like to see. Lastly that we do use our resources University-wide,
the one University concept that I have talked to you about many times, that we focus on the
development of this University and the achievement of our goals by using our resources
collectively across the institution, whether they be in the Lexington campus, the Medical Center,
or the Community College system. Our strength, I believe is in our faculty, our staff, our
students, and the fact that we have some clear vision of where we are going, that we want to
see an Institution that is nationally recognized for the quality of its teaching, research, service,
and its graduates, and that we don't depart from that. The mission of the institution, the mission
of the University of Kentucky is well set, it‘s well established, it's well documented, and it is
defended when necessary. You play such a major role in that; I don't want to miss any
opportunity to tell you how much I appreciate that, and how much I sincerely thank you for the

Minutes, University Senate, April 11, 1994

responsible way, the very responsible way, that we inside this University collectively address
what I think are the major issues that impact higher education in this state and across the nation.

Dan, let me again thank you for your leadership this year. I thank you for the kind of
support you have been able to secure from faculty, staff, and administration in canying out your
responsibilities.

The President then opened the ﬂoor for questions.

Professor Lance Delong (Physics and Astronomy) asked about the trends for supporting
maintenance and operations for new buildings. For example, the situation with robotics, if we
get in tight budgetary times, these very large capital projects will the legislature in fact go along
with the funding necessary?

President Wethington answered that he hoped was that would take place. In the ﬁrst
biennium, we received funding for roughly one half of what we determined to be the
maintenance and operations need for new facilities which have been coming on line during the
last year. That is not sufﬁcient, it has never been sufﬁcient, it won't be sufﬁcient. Remember in
what context that was done; it was a context in which the state's budget was being cut all across
the range. I know that during 1994-1995 we will have a look at formula which generates funds
for higher education. By statute we must review that periodically. The current budget does
carry some language that indicates that will be done again in 1994-95. As part of the
Governor's Higher Education Commission, the Finance Cormnittee part of that, we discussed
long and hard as we were talking about performance funding measures, talked about the fact
that certain costs have got to be built in to any kind of'a funding mechanism for higher
education. I am convinced that the performance funding measures approach is going to be
revised again and we will have better opportunity for input than we did the ﬁrst time. During
1994-95, as the formula gets changed, (the other Institutions feel as we do in this regard)
certain ﬁxed costs have got to be built into any kind of a formula funding mechanism. I can't
assure you of anything except that issue has been raised and there are other Institutions that feel
as we do. Assuming that we do have some better growth in revenue in the next two years that
we had in the last two or three, I feel we will begin to see a better approach to funding the
maintenance and operation of new facilities. Clearly this current one is inadequate.

President Wethington thanked everyone for coming to the Senate meeting on this rainy Monday afternoon
and turned the meeting back over to Chairman Fulks. The President was given a round of applause.

Chairman Fulks thanked President Wethington.

Chairman Fulks said that there were about three weeks left until the end of the semester. He agrees with
the President that it has been a very challenging year. There have been lots of opportunities, there has been” a lot
done during the year. The faculty, the senate. the students, and the Senate Council have done much this year and
there is much still to do. The Ad Hoc Committees will be working all through the summer and next fall as well.

Minutes, University Senate, April ll, 1994

The Chair thanked Cindy Todd, who is the glue that holds the Senate Council together and keeps things
going, Glifford Blyton, who has added another year onto his 20 years or so as Parliamentarian, Randy Dahl,
secretary of the Senate, and Susan Caldwell who has been struggling with the minutes all year, in a year in which
we decided to move from hard copy to putting the minutes on View. We have just about gotten that done. The
Sergeants at Arms; Jacquie Hager and Michelle Sohner. All the former chairs of the Senate Council have been
there when he has called and have been very helpful when needed, that has been a much appreciated crutch. The
Chairs of the various Senate committees, have been working as well as the committee members have been
working all year, and their work and service to the University is appreciated. The three Ad Hoc Committees, still
working and being productive. Finally a special thanks to a couple of groups; the students as always have been
refreshing, invigorating, and energizing and tend to remind us why we are here. To all members of the Senate,
you have been a great group to work with. It has been a challenging and productive year. Since the last
meeting, Professor Gretchen LaGodna has been elected Chair-elect of the Senate Council for the 1994-95
academic year, which means she will take over as Chair of the Senate Council for the 1995-96 academic year.
The Senate will be in very capable hands with Gretchen. Professor Ray Cox has been Chair-elect this year, he
has been a lot of help this year, on May 15, 1994 he will be taking over as chair of the Senate Council. Professor
Fulks then read a quote from Ernest Boyer, from the Carnegie Foundation who said "A college or University
must be above all a purposeful community, a place where teaching and learning matter most and if academic
concerns are not vitally sustained, if faculty and students do not come together around a common intellectual
quest, than all the talk about strengthening community in higher education is simply a diversion". I think we have
shown good community spirit here during the year and I hope we will continue do so.

The Chair made the following announcements:

Commencement Day is May 8, 1994, he encouraged everyone to attend. Those who have been there know
how exciting it is and will be there again, those who haven't attended need to try it.

There is a new Ad Hoc Committee which will study the University retirement system and retirement
incentives. There is a new federal law which says they can stay as long as they want as long as they are tenured.
They need to look at what the University is doing to encourage faculty to take advantage of retirement. They
have identified the people they would like to serve on the committee. Professor Chet Holmquist has agreed to
chair the committee. He is from the emeritus faculty group. He encourages anyone with input, questions, or
things the committee needs to address please contact Professor Holrnquist or call the Senate Council office.

As you recall last month the Senate approved the nominations for the honorary degrees and as they did so,
they asked for conﬁdentiality in good faith. As many have pointed out to the Senate Council ofﬁce, two days
later there was an article in the Kernel discussing the nominees. That did not escape the Council's attention nor
did it escape President Wethington's attention. They did correspond with the Kernel staff. Dan Reedy, John
Piecoro, President Wethington and I did. Although the Kernel staff did not choose to respond, Mike Agin, the
advisor for student media, responded to them. This was an embarrassing situation. We have decided in the
future to call an executive session as they approve honorary degree nominees.

Minutes, University Senate, April 11, 1994

There was some confusion with voting last month. The Senate was hit by surprise with a roll call vote.
Most of the confusion centered around who is entitled to vote and who is not. There are several ex ofﬁcio
members of the Senate, some vote and some do not, that changes from one year to the next. If anyone has
questions about voting eligibility they should check out Senate Rules 1.2.2.4.

The Chair stated the ﬁrst item on the agenda was to approve the minutes from the February 14, 1994
meeting. There were no corrections to the minutes and they were approved as circulated.

Chairman Fulks then recognized Professor Ray Cox, Chair-elect of the Senate Council for the first action
item. Professor Cox stated there were two changes to the proposal. The ﬁrst change is the effective date will be
August 1994. The second change is under 5.4.2 Commencement Honors, Item 1, there is no such thing now as
highest distinction so the strikeover should not even exist. All of item one is essentially new language and a new
designation of commencement honors. Professor Cox on behalf of the Senate Council moved approval of the
proposed change to the Universig Senate Rules, Section V, attending the University.

Chairman Fulks pointed out a clariﬁcation from the Senate Rules. Students with a minimum of two but less
than three years of work at this University, that is students transferring in, should receive the appropriate
commencement honors if they obtain a GPA of .2 percentage points higher than these listed. That would not
change.

There was no discussion. In a voice vote, the proposal as amended unanimously passed and reads as
follows:

Proposed changes to Universng Senate Rules, Section V, attending the University.

Background and Rationale:

Current Senate Rules concerning graduation with honors make reference to "Distinction, High
Distinction, and Highest Distinction." The Senate Council believes that our graduates would
be better served if the more commonly used "cum laude" designations were adopted. These
designations are more universally utilized by the academic community and, consequently,
better recognized and more meaningful.”

Proposal: (Delete strikeovers; add underlining)
5.4.2 COMMENCEMENT HONORS

1. Students shall be graduated "Summa Cum Laude" who attain a grade point
average of 3.8 or higher for at least three years of work at the University of
Kentucky (excepting correspondence study).

Minutes, University Senate, April 11, 1994

2. Students shall be graduated With-High—Bistiﬂeﬁenl "Magga Cum Laude" who
attain a grade point average of 3.6 to 3.8 for at least three years of work at the

University of Kentucky (excepting correspondence study).

. Students shall be graduated W "Cum Laude" who attain a grade
point average of 3.4 to 3.6 for at least three years of work at the University of
Kentucky (excepting correspondence study).

Effective Date: If approved by the Senate, these changes will be effective for August 1994
graduates.

The Senate Council recommends approval.

Chairman Fulks recognized Professor Ray Cox for the next agenda item. Professor Cox recommended
approval, on behalf of the Senate Council, of the proposed changes to the repeat options in the Universig Senate
Rules, Section V, Attending the University. The item was circulated under the date of March 13, 1994.

Professor Hans Gesund wondered how this would affect calculation of probation, suspension, and
advancement to upper division. All of which depend upon grade point averages. At this time, the student has to
make the selection of the repeat option before ﬁnal exams, under this the student will know exactly what grade
he has received. Since the student does not have to exercise the option until graduation, how will this work,
when the other calculations have to be made in between. He can see some real problems.

Chairman Fulks said in his opinion it was the student‘s call to exercise the option whenever he or she
wanted to. If the students do not exercise the option until very late, then probation, suspension, and admission to
upper division would have to move along with the GPA as is. The student has the control over that. Those
would be the consequences of not exercising the repeat option until late. Professor Gesund asked what would
happen if the student took the course three times? There is another rule that says only the second time counts.
This is meant to make advising easier and clearer.

Professor Dan Reedy (Graduate School) said that since this written primarily for undergraduate students
that it did not impact the one repeat only for graduate students. Since pass fail is not an acceptable grade at the
graduate level that it does not involve that. In terms of practice he is not opposed to the idea of approval after
the fact. He often writes letters asking that the rules be suspended, because it is a problem in advising. Dr.
Reedy wanted to be certain that this does not supersede the rules of the graduate faculty on one repeat option.
Chairman Fulks answered that it did not.

Professor Louis Swift (Dean - Undergraduate Studies) asked if this meant there could be two separate
records out for a particular student who has been certiﬁed as meeting certain requirements. How will that be
managed? If a student does not graduate, do they simply go by his or her graduation year? If the student drops
out of the University and wants to get something changed on their record are they able to do that? He is more
concerned about two sets of records. Chairman Fulks asked why there would be two sets of records? Professor

Minutes, University Senate, April ll, 1994

Swift answered that Dr. Dahl had told him there were times when he had to certify that the student meets certain
requirements, under certain circumstances the student does, with the repeat option he may not.

Dr. Randall Dahl (University Registrar) stated that in thinking through the proposed change, this could have
the effect of altering history for a given student. There is the possibility of multiple, conﬂicting, valid ofﬁcial
transcripts being in circulation simultaneously. The repeat option could be exercised at some time