xt7rfj29d457 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7rfj29d457/data/mets.xml University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate Kentucky University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate 1971-04-12 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 12, 1971 text University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, April 12, 1971 1971 1971-04-12 2020 true xt7rfj29d457 section xt7rfj29d457
MINUTES OF THE UNIVERSITY SENATE, APRIL 12, 1971
The University Senate met in regular session at 3:00 p.m., Monday, £52,
April 12, 1971, in the Court Room of the Law Building. In the absence ,9
of the Chairman, the Vice Chairman of the Senate Council, Dr. Staley (
Adams, presided. Members absent: Arnold D. Albright, Lawrence A.
Allen*, Clifford Amyx, Robert Aug*, Lyle N. Back, James R. Barclay*,
Charles E. Barnhart, Henry H. Bauer*, Robert A. Beargie, Harmon C.
Bickley, Jr.*, Harold R. Binkley*, Harry M. Bohannan*, Peter P. %
Bosomworth*, Betty J. Brannan*, Russell H. Brannon*, Gordon Brocklehurst,
Michael Bruer*, Marion A. Carnes*, Clyde R. Carpenter, S. K. Chan*,
Richard A. Chapman*, David B. Clark*, José M. Concon, William B. Cotter,
Eugene C. Crawford, Jr., Glenwood L. Creech, Donald P. Cross*, M.
Ward Crowe*, Marcia A. Dake*, Robert M. Drake, Jr.*, John P. Drysdale*,
Ronald W. Dunbar, Lawrence E. Forgy, Jr., Donald T. Frazier, Joseph B. I
Fugate*, Eugene B. Gallagher*, Leonard S. Gettes*, Charles P. Graves*,
Kenneth J. Guido, Jr., John V. Haley*, Joseph Hamburg, Holman Hamilton*,
Virgil W. Hays*, James W. Herron*, A. J. Hiatt*, Donald L. Hochstrasser*,
Charles W. Hultman*, John W. Hutchinson*, Kate T. Irvine*, Robert D. 4M5.
Jacobs, Raymon D. Johnson, William S. Jordan, Jr.*, William F. Kenkel*, ‘d “
Donald E. Knapp*, James A. Knoblett*, Raymond LaCharite*, Walter G.
Langlois*, Harold R. Laswell, Robert Lauderdale, Jr.*, Thomas J. Leonard*,
Charles T. Lesshafft*, Richard Lowitt*, Donald L. Madden*, Leslie L.
Martin*, Rogert M. McCoy, William C. McCrary*, L. Randolph McGee*,
William R. Merritt, Jr.*, William G. Moody*, Theodore H. Mueller*,
Vernbn A. Musselman*, John Nelson*, A. C. R. Newbery, Leonard V. Packett*
Blaine F. Parker*, Curtis Phipps*, William K. P1ucknett*, Leonard A.
RavitZ*, Lloyd F. Redick, Herbert G. Reid*, Sheldon Rovin*, John
S. Scarborough, George W. Schwert*, D. Milton Shuffett*, Malcolm R.
Siegel*, Joe F. Sills, Otis A. Singletary*, Raymond A. Smith*, Walter T.
Smith*, Armond E. Spencer, Hugh A. Storrow*, Robert H. Stroup*, Roy E.
Swift*, Norman L. Taylor*, Timothy H. Taylor, Harwin L. Voss*, M.
Stanley Wall, Charles A. Walton, James H. Wells, Cornelia B. Wilbur*,
William F. Willard, Alfred D. Winer*, Miroslava B. Winer*, Fred Zechman*,
Leon Zolondek, Robert G. Zumwinkle*.
The minutes of March 8, 1971 were approved as circulated.
‘Dr. A. Lee Coleman, Department of Sociology, presented resolutions .
on the Death of Dr. Harry Best, professor emeritus of that department. f
The Senate stood for a minute of silence in respect to Dr. Best and in
acceptance of the resolutions.
HARRY BEST
1880—1971
Harry Best, professor emeritus of sociology, University.of
Kentucky, died suddenly on February 23, 1971, in his 9lst year.
He had worked as usual in his office at the University the day
before and was having breakfast at a drug store on his way to the
office when he died. A lifelong bachelor, he lived in recent ‘gfl‘
years in one room of the house he formerly owned, took his meals '7/
out, and rode the bus to campus. He had outlived most of his
family and close friends, though colleagues and students in the ‘
Department of Sociology tried to look after him to the extent
*Absence explained
Minutes of the University Senate, April 12, 1971
that his independence would permit.
Entering sociology during the social problems—social reform
era of the profession Dr. Best remained steadfast in this orientation
when the profession turned away but he lived to see the trend
shift again toward direct involvement in social reform. Influenced
by his own lifetime handicap of deafness, he made the various
categories of the physically and mentally handicapped the special
concern of his research and writing and of his reform efforts.
But he was also a lifelong advocate of social reform concerning
labor, poverty, welfare, prisons and corrections, and race relations.
His frequent letters to the editor of the Louisville Courier—Journal
and other newspapers over many years pleaded with the people of
his native state to do something about a particular social condition
or needed reform. In his early years he taught in schools for
the blind and deaf, trained Red Cross workers, worked in a New
York City settlement house, and was active in church youth work
and the Boys Club movement. In the 1940's, some years before
school desegregation in Kentucky, Dr. Best moved in the University
Senate that the University open its doors without regard to race.
Born in Millersburg, Kentucky, December 23, 1880, Dr. Best
received the A.B. from Centre College, M.A.'s from Gallaudet
College and George Washington University, the L.L.B. from New
York Law School, and the Ph.D. from Columbia University. He
was awarded honorary degrees by Centre, Gallaudet, and the
University of Kentucky. In 1954 he received the Migel Medal of
the American Foundation for the Blind, the presentation being made
by Helen Keller. He was active in a long list of professional,
welfare, and social reform organizations, served as an officer in
the Southern and Ohio Valley Sociological Societies, and was a
consultant to various governmental agencies and other organizations.
He joined the University of Kentucky in 1919 and for several years
was the entire faculty in sociology; he lived to see it increase
‘25—fold.
He was the author of approximately 12 books and monographs,
as well as government bulletins, special reports, and journal
and periodical articles. Several of his books were published
after his ”retirement” in 1951. Despite his reform orientation,
his books were scholarly rather than polemical. The range of
subjects was wide——handicapped persons (the blind, the deaf,
epileptics, the mentally handicapped), crime and criminal justice,
labor, the Soviet Union, corrupt practices and election reform,
the church in society. His articles appeared in the American
Sociological Review, Social Forces, American Economic Review,
Journal of the American Medical Association, Probation, Survey,
and Journal of the American Bar Association, among others. He wrote
sections in the Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, Social Work
Yearbook, and the Dictionary 9f_American History. At his death he
was working on a book on the mentally handicapped and revising
several other previous works.
On the occasion of his 90th birthday, in December 1970 just
Minutes of the University Senate, April 12, 1971
two months before his death, the Department of Sociology honored
him with a reception attended by about 200 persons, most of whom
he greeted personally. It was obvious that he thoroughly enjoyed
the occasion.
Although his work and his writing were his life, Dr. Best
was a sports fan, a tennis player until recently, a lover of
classical music, a loyal member of the Presbyterian Church, and
an inveterate traveler. The last of his five trips abroad was
made alone when he was 85.
In every sense he was a gentleman and a scholar, perhaps a
vanishing breed!
The Acting Chairman made the following announcements to the Senate:
1. The Board of Trustees of the University of Kentucky has
indicated its desire to continue its annual tradition of honoring
the University Senate. Therefore, the Board of Trustees will, by
individual invitations to members of the Senate and their spouses,
honor the Senate at an informal reception at Spindletop Hall on
Monday, May 3, 1971 from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m.
The Acting Chairman stated further that on behalf of the University
Senate he was asking that the Secretary of the Senate be charged
with the responsibility of responding to this gracious invitation
of the Board of Trustees on this date and time.
2. Dean Jack Hall has made several revisions in the Student Code
which have been transmitted to Mr. George W. Griffin, Chairman
of the Board of Trustees Student Code Revision Committee. These
revisions are on file in the Senate Council Office, 10 Administration
Building, and one can go to that office to read what recommendations
Dean Hall has made.
In addition, Mr. Griffin's Committee will have an open hearing in
the President's Room, Student Center, on April 16, 1971, from 10:00
to 12:00 noon and from 1:00 to 2:30 p.m. The Committee will
consider the recommendations of Dean Hall and also the list that
Mr. Steve Bright sent to the Committee. This will be an open hearing
and faculty members are invited to be present.
3. There will be a special meeting of the University Senate on
Tuesday, April 27, 1971, at 3:00 p.m. in the Court Room of the
Law Building. Items of business on the agenda will include the
candidates for degrees at the May Commencement, recommendations
on the Hunt Morgan School, codification of the Tripartite Committee
Report, and other items.
4. In addition to this special meeting, there will be a regular
meeting of the Senate at 3:00 p.m., Monday, May 10, 1971, in the
Court Room of the Law Building, for the purpose of winding up
the year's business.
The Acting Chairman introduced to the Senators Mr. Scott Wendelsdorf of
the College of Law, the new President of the Student Government Association.
Minutes of the University Senate, April 12, 1971
The Acting Chairman presented the annual reports of the University
( Senate from the Honors Program Committee, the Library Committee, the
£525 Rules Committee, the Senate Advisory Committee for International Programs,
’ the Senate Advisory Committee on the Center foerevelopmental Change,
the Senate Advisory Committee on the Community Colleges, the Senate
Advisory Committee on Privilege and Tenure, and the Senate Advisory
) Committee on Student Affairs which had been circulated to the faculty
‘ under date of March 31, 1971. He stated that these Reports were a summary
3 of the previous year's work and that he would entertain a motion that the
Senate accept these Reports and direct the Secretary of the Senate to
file them with the minutes. The Senate approved a motion to accept these
eight reports of the University Senate Committees for filing with the minutes.
March 22, 1971
TO: University Senate
FROM: Senate Advisory Committee on Student Affairs
gia SUBJECT:
I. The Senate Advisory Committee on Student Affairs met
with the Vice President for Student Affairs and his
division heads concerning philosophies and common
goals as pertaining to University of Kentucky students.
Annual Report
I II. The Committee screened and recommended to President
‘ Singletary fourteen students' applications for Student
Publications Board.
III. At its regular meeting of March 8, 1971 the University
Senate approved the recommendation of the Senate
Advisory Committee on Student Affairs for an amendment
to the rules of the University Senate, Revised October,
1970, to add to Section V, Student Academic Affairs,
4%55 an additional paragraph G, which provides for student
5‘7‘ participation in academic affairs.
The proposal which the University Senate approved
? reads as follows:
Student Participation in Academic Affairs
. l. The faculty of each college within the University
and the faculty of the Graduate School shall
establish some form of Student Advisory Council
(SAC) to represent student opinion on academic
matters pertinent to that college or school.
2. The form for each council as well as the areas of
responsibility shall be determined by the faculty
&% of the college or school. Students themselves
‘5 ' shall be reSponsible for the selection of council
members by democratic process. Each student ad—
visory council shall keep records of its proceedings.
Minutes of the University Senate, April 12, 1971
The Dean of such college or school shall forward ‘
for approval a statement of form and of areas of {
responsibility to (a) the Senate Advisory Committee éfiéa
on Student Affairs and (b) the President. w?
3. The faculty of each college or school shall deter—
mine whether a student member of its Student Ad—
visory Council shall be entitled to vote with (
its faculty council or equivalent body on academic
affairs.
IV. The committee is currently working on plans and procedures
for student evaluation of the faculty.
C. Frank Buck ;
Chairman ,
31 March 1971
Report of the University Senate Advisory Committee on Privilege
and Tenure ‘
The Committee considered in detail and prepared recommendations
on a number of cases of alleged violation of academic freedom (
and/or privilege. It has also advised a number of individual
faculty members on their rights under the Governing Regulations.
A few cases are still pending. The Committee has not so far
recommended that a Hearing Panel be convened to conduct a
formal inquiry in any of the cases which have come before it.
R. Eichhorn, Chairman
Richard Thurs ton éa
W. S. Ward ~‘;
R. H. Weaver
C. P. Wilson
March 24, 1971
Report to: Senate Council
From: Senate Advisory Committee on Community Colleges
1. At the Senate meeting of March 9, 1970, several recom—
mendations relative to the Community College System were
proposed by this committee and passed by the Senate. ‘gfl.
These recommendations proved to be of major importance to J
the System; some of them have been put into practice while
others are still in the process of being implemented.
)
. .. . ....y
...,,...,.,,...,. x,.,....,.. ,.... ‘
Minutes of the University Senate, April 12, 1971 3129
‘ 2. A ”task force” Committee on Organization and Programs of the
{ Community Colleges has been working this year preparing other
éfiéa major recommendations pertaining to the Community College
System. The membership of the committee is as follows:
Two Directors — R. Kelley (Somerset), C. Wethington (Maysville)
One Advisory Board Member — H. Lackey (Henderson)
I Two Faculty — E. Kemp (Paducah), J. B. Major (Hopkinsville)
f Two Students — C. Rolston (Prestonsburg), A. Howard (Southeast)
. Lexington Campus Representative — E. M. Hammaker
This committee expects to make its report to President Singletary
by the end of April, 1971.
; 3. In view of the preceding two items, the Senate Advisory Committee
, has met only once this year, to prepare some suggestions for the
”task force" committee. It has no new recommendations to put
before the Senate at this time.
«(h Respectfully submitted,
. Marc Blair
Loretta M. Denman .5‘.
Donald L. Madden V "
Catherine Soltess
Donald M. Soule 1 [aflr‘
Cliff Swauger, Jr.
Charles G. Talbert
William S. Ward
Wesley 0. Young
Ellwood M. Hammaker, Chairman
1
UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY ‘i
Senate Rules Committee
1970 — 1971
1 Seven full Committee meetings to date since 1970 annual report.
Additional sub—committee meetings and considerable work and
reports by individual members.
MAJOR ITEMS E BUSINESS
1. New probation rules for the College of Pharmacy. (April 3, 1970)
2. Changes in Senate regulations necessitated by Senate adoption of
% Committee on Television. (April 3, 1970)
‘ )
3. Composition and function of academic area committees. (April 3, 1970)
4. Changes in composition of Senate and Senate Council. (April 8, 1970)
C3130 Minutes of the University Senate, April 12, 1971
5. Pass—Fail grade for Practice Teaching and specification
that University courses offered only on pass—fail basis
not count against students' option to take four courses
on pass—fail. (April 15, 1970)
6. Council's request for recommendations on conduct of
Senate meetings: place, control of seating and voting
procedures, conditions for visitors, etc. (July 9, 1970)
7. Insertion into Senate regulations of those sections of the
new Student Code dealing with academic affairs. (August 25,
1970)
8. Conditions for election of non—voting faculty members of
the Board of Trustees. (August 25, 1970)
9. Consideration of Senate Council's recommendations for
working relations with Rules Committee, establishment of
ad hoc committees. (Feb. 3, 1971)
10. Eligibility of individual faculty members for election the
Senate. (February 3, 1971)
11. Procedures for election of members of the Graduate Council.
(February 3, 1971)
signed/James E. Criswell
Chairman
REPORT TO THE SENATE BY
HONORS PROGRAM COMMITTEE
This semester there are 321 active student participants in
the Honors Program. This is an increase of 71 students over the
previous year. This year's group of honors program students
is composed of 111 Freshmen, 102 Sophomores, 67 Juniors and 41
Seniors.
The number of Freshmen accepted for next fall will depend
on the size of the faculty serving the honors program. In—
creases in the number of Freshmen accepted for the honors
program will occur only if there is an increase in faculty.
With the present faculty, increasing the number of Freshmen
would result in large classes, which would destroy the honors
program concept of small classes.
Ten freshmen, chosen for the fall 1971 honors program,
have been awarded scholarships of $500. These scholarships
were made available from special funds and apparently are not
recurring. Five additional scholarships have been made avail—
able by the Rotary Club.
The Honors Program Committee approved three courses under
Arts and Sciences 300. The committee voted to discontinue its
Minutes of the University Senate, April 12, 1971
functions as the body responsible for approving Arts and Sciences
1 300 courses.
Suggestions by the committee for improvements in the program
1 fall under two categories, i.e. suggestions which the Director
‘ could follow without further consultation and suggestions to the
Senate Council for implementation by that body.
[ Suggestions to the Director:
1. That a program be developed to inform high school
counselors of the honors program at U. K. At present,
many counselors are poorly informed of the honors program
at U. K. and, as a result, advise students to go to other
r schools or not to enroll in the honors program. 3
2. A more effective method is needed to determine the
top students in Kentucky.
“ 3. That the size of some honor program classes and 1.
l colloquia be reduced. 1
Recommendations to the Senate:
1. This committee appreciates the special scholarships
made available by the President for the fall 1971
semester and recommends that these scholarships be made
available on a yearly basis.
2. The success of the program depends on adequate ‘f.fi
funding. At present, some areas of the program are not h
, being funded adequately. More funding is needed if this
I this program is to grow and improve at our University.
3. That the counsel of the Director be sought before any
changes in funding and budgetary procedures are made. 3 1?
Respectfully submitted,
signed/Bruce E. Langlois
{ Bruce E. Langlois, Chairman
Honors Program Committee
Associate Professor of Animal Sciences
Professor Thomas Leonard
5 Professor John Lienhard
Professor James Morris 3
Professor Thomas Olshewsky
Professor Daniel Reedy
Professor Robert Stokes
Professor Harry Wheeler
&4% Mr. Tom Converse — Student
’ Mr. Jerry Goerz — Student
Minutes of the University Senate, April 12, 1971
Report of the Senate Library Committee, 1970/71
Since a substantial report was furnished the Senate last
year on the conditions which still prevail and since the Library
section of the Self—Study Report was an exhaustive and exhausting
document, the present Library Committee find it unnecessary
to provide a lengthy report at this time. Shakespeare's
axiom on brevity seems apropos.
The Committee has met four times during the present academic
year. Its members have discussed many of the problems confronting
the Library in its attempt to provide proper services for the
University. These problems concern the expansion of the physical
plant, the development of the library's collection, its personnel,
and its budget. The results of our deliberations may be divided
into positive and the negative findings, the gains and the
losses, the progress made and the retrogress endured during the
year.
To the positive first. Attending a dramatic meeting of the
Committee on February 3, 1971, the President of the University
and the Vice President for Business Affairs announced, with con—
siderable pleasure, that approximately $3.7 million had been
provided for an addition to the physical plant of the Margaret
I. King Library. This addition will be built to the north of
the present building, where Splinter Hall once stood. It
will house the support services of the Library and certain
special functions, such as the acquisitions and cataloguing
departments, bindery preparation, serials record, shipping and
receiving, administrative offices, the Special Collections and
University Archives, and perhaps a divisional art library. The
addition, in short, will house all those services of the Library
which are normally closed at 5 p.m., leaving the present building
cleared WhOllyfor circulation, reading, reference, periodicals,
etc., in short all those services which are now provided from
8 a.m. to 12 midnight. It will clear out an extra 40,000
square feet in the present building for additional books and
reading space. Just as soon as the architects provide the
plans and the bids are let to the contractors, work on the
building will begin. It is thought that actual digging may
begin within the next six months. Needless to say, your Committee
were elated at this surprise announcement and much pleased that
the Library administration managed so well to provide its
plan for the addition on such short notice. While this addition
will not solve all the space problems for the foreseeable
future, it will soon alleviate present conditions. The Committee
approves the plan and urges the completion of the building with
all deliberate speed.
The committee note with pleasure the acquisition of several
collections of official papers of notable public figures,
especially those of Senator Thruston B. Morton. '
At the request of the Vice President for Academic Affairs,
the Chairman appointed a sub—committee from the Library Committee
as an Area Committee to consider the appointment and promotion
of members of the Library staff. (Provision for such area
committee was recommended in last year's report, though the
method of appointment was not provided in that report.) This
l
f
a,
an
)
.W-‘v7——— _
Minutes of the University Senate, April 12, 1971
area committee has set up a method of procedure to be followed
and has made its recommendations for the year to the Vice President
a for Academic Affairs.
Although the Library book budget for 1970/71 has been
reduced from that of 1969/70, no major legitimate or reasonable
request for a purchase of books has so far been denied, though
rescheduling of purchasing plans have in some instances been
required. It is doubtful such record can be lived up to in future.
f The members of the Committee are gratified at these accomplish—
} ments; it cannot say the same for what follows.
Although the appropriated budget for the purchase of books,
binding, and periodicals was reduced from $867,100 in 1969/70
to $747,000 in 1970/71 (additional funds from federal grants of
$26,870 were also spent), the proposed budget for 1971/72 does
not restore the reduction; rather it leaves the allocation the
same——and this in spite of the fact that the costs of books and
periodicals have risen very greatly within the last two years
(9.
V
‘fi.fi h—~
‘ and are still rising. Altogether this represents a loss of ~
éMflh perhaps 15% in acquisitions. No new positions have been added 0
A“' to the staff in the last year, and none will be added during the i
(, next——and that in spite of the fact that the number of students 1
has risen by some 16.4 percent within the period. No new services 3
l have been provided during the period, except for the weekly
‘ acquisitions list this year——and that has now been discontinued
for lack of funds. And no new services can be expected within the
. next year. Moreover, the book budget will not now allow purchase of
significamt retrospective publications, such as reprints of files
{ of journals which we sorely need. The Committee have observed
L that the Administration has from time to time instituted new
' colleges, schools, departments, and graduate programs without at ‘H‘,‘
I the same time making provisions for additions to the library ; w
1 budget so as to take care of the Library needs for such expansion ”
[ of the University's academic offerings. These expansions have
7 at times put a heavy strain upon the book budget of the Library,
, and at best library materials for such programs are often inadequate.
4%; Some members of the University have noticed that the Library
shelves are sometimes in a shambles, expecially on Monday mornings.
L Obviously more frequent shelf—reading is required. Others have
1 noticed that many books are somehow lost and some perhaps stolen
( because of inadequate surveillance. And others will have
I noticed other inconveniences in the service. The remarkable
‘ fact is that under the present budget so few of these exist. The
Library staff simply needs expansion.
; The Library Committee therefore makes the following recommendations:
1_ 1. That the Administration of the University re—examine the
I budget with a View to restoring the budget of 1969/70, or such
‘ part of it as will provide minimal improvement of services and
meet the increased price of books.
2. That the Administration begin now, not years hence, to
develop plans for three new phases in future additions to the
physical plant: an addition to the present Margaret 1. King
Agfl‘ building where Pence Hall now stands, a reading—reference
library for undergraduates within the dormitory complex, and
provision for the building and improvement of departmental libraries.
3. That the Library Administration take whatever steps it
can to improve the shelf—reading in the Margaret I. King Library
and the surveillance of the borrowers of books. (While the cost
.2?-
gf—V"*-‘—A i .
Minutes of the University Senate, April 12, 1971
of replacing books lost and stolen runs to only 1.1 per cent,
the inconvenience, the cost of re—ordering those which can be
replaced, the fact that some can never be replaced, and the
student's frustration constitute a very serious net loss to
the University Community.)
4. That no new schools, colleges, departments, or graduate
programs be instituted in the University without sufficient
funds being added to the Library budget to provide adequately
for the library needs of such programs.
Library Committee:
Thomas B. Stroup, English, Chairman
Kathy Moore, Student Louise Robbins, Anthropology
Wendy McCarty, Student John Scarborough, History
Foster B. Cady, Jr., Statistics Nancy Patton, Physical Therapy
John P. Drysdale, Sociology Wesley J. Birge, Zoology
L. Randolph McGee, Economics Stuart Forth, Director
Harry Barnard, Education Margaret I. King Library
Otis A. Singletary, ex officio
REPORT OF THE SENATE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THE
CENTER FOR DEVELOPMENTAL CHANGE
The Center for Developmental Change (CDC) is a multi—
disciplinary unit of the University with the following objectives:
(1) To promote the Study of developmental change (planned change,
directed towards chosen goals). (2) To discover ways in which
the principles of developmental change may be applied effectively.
(3) To organize training in the skills of developmental change.
(4) To work with units of the University crossing disciplinary
and professional boundaries to organize resources and attack
problems both domestic and international. The enclosed brochure
describes the current activities of CDC.
The Senate Advisory Committee on the Center for Developmental
Change was an integral part of the original proposal for the
Center and has existed since the appointment of the first com—
mittee in 1967. The Committee is charged with counseling the
CDC staff on matters of general policy and program planning and
reporting to the Senate on the operations of the Center.
During the 1970—71 academic year, this Committee met with
the staff of CDC in an all-day meeting on September 22, 1970.
In this meeting the Committee heard reports from the directors
of the various activities of the Center and helped plan the
activities for the academic year. In addition, individual
members of the Committee participated in planning decisions and
operations throughout the year.
During the year 1970—71, the policies of CDC were to focus
on four program directions: (1) University renewal and redirection
with emphasis on cooperation with offices of institutional planning
and other units concerned with redefining the University's
purposes, priorities and planning. (2) Interdisciplinary training
Minutes of the University Senate, April 12, 1971
of social practitioners with a continuation of the Peace Corps
activities and student involvement in developmental and educational
learning experiences. (3) Multidisciplinary research with con—
tinuation of research programs on migration, institutional building,
communications, family planning, environmental problems, and
(4) Interunit cooperation on miscel—
laneous developmental change activities by sponsoring seminars,
symposia, publications and promoting joint interests with selected
organizations and agencies with international focus and coopera—
developmental assistance.
tion with state and regional agencies.
The Office for International Programs, a unit within CDC,
is advised by a separate Senate Committee which tenders its
own report to the Senate.
During the year 1970—71, the Center for Developmental Change
used the self—study process as a means of planning its direction
for the next ten years with particular focus on its actual
accomplishments of the last seven years.
The Senate Advisory Committee was impressed with the poten—
tials for such activities as the Center for Developmental
Change and recommends that the concept of CDC be implemented
further through the more active participation of departments and
individual faculty members in utilizing the unit as a means of
launching new research and service activities.
As a result of changes and problems of the past several
years in universities, probably the program direction involved
with University renewal and redirection will require additional
emphasis by CDC in the future.
THE SENATE ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS
University of Kentucky
The m