xt7vdn3zwn58 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7vdn3zwn58/data/mets.xml University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate Kentucky University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate 1979-12-10  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, December 10, 1979 text University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, December 10, 1979 1979 1979-12-10 2020 true xt7vdn3zwn58 section xt7vdn3zwn58 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY
LEXINGTO‘I. KENTUCKY 40506

UNIVERSITY SENATE COUNCIL
IO ADMINISTRATION BUILDING

November 28, 1979

Members , University Senate

The University Senate will meet in regular session on Monday, December
10, 1979 at 3:00 p.m. in Room 206 Classroom Building.

AGENDA:
Approval of the Minutes of October 8, 1979.
Memorial Resolutions
Chairman's Report:

Resource Allocations Sub-committee
General Studies Committee

Athletic Events

Privilege and Tenure Recommendation
Senate Council Membership

Senate Christmas Party

Action Items:

a) Proposed addition to University Senate Rules, Admis-
sions Standards for the Honors Program. (Circulated
under date of November 28, 1979).

Proposed change in University Senate Rules, Section VI,

4. 6, last paragraph, dealing with communications regard-
ing suspension of students (circulated under date of Novem-
ber 28, 1979).

Proposed addition to the University Senate Rules for a
Double Major across College lines (circulated under date
of November 28, 1979).

Elbert W. Ockerman
Secretary

AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY UNIVERSITY

 

 MINUTES OF THE UNIVERSITY SENATE, DECEMBER 10, 1979

The University Senate met in regular session at 3:00 p.m., Monday, December 10,
1979, in Room 106 of the Classroom Building.

Joseph Krislov, Chairman, presiding

Members absent: Michael Adelstein*, M. I. H. Aleem*, C. Dwight Auvenshine*, Charles
E. Barnhart, James C. Beidleman, Janis L. Bellack*, John J. Bernardo*, Brack A. Bivins,
Jack C. Blanton, James A. Boling*, Peter P. Bosomworth*, Robert N. Bostrom, Barbara
Bryant, Joseph T. Burch, Michael D. Carpenter*, W. Merle Carter*, Donald B. Clapp, Bob
Clark, Charlotte Clark, D. Kay Clawson*, Lewis W. Cochran*, James S. Cole, Samuel F.
Conti*, Margaret Cornell, Clifford J. Cremers*, Lynne Crutcher, Paul Davis, Guy M.
Davenport*, George W. Denemark*, David E. Denton*, Ronald C. Dillehay*, Marcus L. Dillon*,
Richard C. Domek, Joseph M. Dougherty, Herbert Drennon, Roland Duell*, Anthony Eardley,
W. W. Ect0n*, Roger Eichhorn*, Lee A. Elioseff, Jane Emanuel, Jana Floyd, Tom Francis,
John H. Garvey*, Hans Gesund*, Jon P. Gockerman*, Steve Goldstein, Mitch Griffin, Andrew
J. Grimes*, George W. Gunther*, Robert D. Guthrie, Joseph Hamburg, S. Zafar Hasan*,
Virgil W. Hays*, Raymond R. Hornback, Alfred S. L. Hu, Clyde L. Irwin, Donald W. Ivey*,
Freddie James*, Dean Jaros*, Wesley H. Jones*, John J. Just, William B. Lacy*, James R.
Lang, Donald C. Leigh, Thomas P. Lewis*, Thomas T. Lillich*, Carolyn G. Litchfield*,
William J. Marshall, Marion E. McKenna*, Phillip W. Miller, Philip J. Noffsinger,
Elbert W. Ockerman*, Clayton Omvig*, Merrill W. Packer, Leonard V. Packett*, Anne
Policastri*, Deborah E. Powell, David Prior*, E. Douglas Rees, Paul Roark, Wimberly C.
Royster*, Robert W. Rudd*, Pritam S. Sabharwal*, Kathryn Sallee*, John S. Scarborough,
D. Milton Shuffett, Otis A. Singletary*, Julie Skaggs, John T. Smith, Tim Smith, Wade C.
Smith*, David A. Spaeth*, Lynn Spruill, Edward F. Stanton*, Marjorie S. Stewart*, Harold
H. Traurig*, M. Stanley Wall, Marc J. Wallace, James H. Wells, Paul A. Willis*, Constance
P. Wilson, Ralph F. Wiseman*, Patch G. Woolfolk*

The minutes of the meeting of October 8, 1979, were approved as circulated.

Chairman Krislov recognized Professor Willis A. Sutton who presented the following
Memorial Resolution on the death of Dr. John A. O'Donnell.

‘ MEMORIAL RESOLUTION
John A. O'Donnell 1916-1979

On October 17, 1979, John A. O'Donnell, an internationally
acclaimed expert on drug abuse and a Professor of Sociology at
the University of Kentucky, died in his sleep. He had spent the
day working in his office and was resting in order to enjoy the
final game of the world series. Born on October 29, 1916 in
Jersey City, New Jersey, he received his A.B. from St. Peter's
College in New Jersey, in 1938, his M.A. from Fordham in 1940,
and his Ph.D. from the University of Kentucky in 1960. After
earning his Master's degree, Professor O'Donnell was a caseworker
for the Catholic Home Bureau in New York City for two years.

With the outbreak of World War II, O'Donnell entered the
Army as a private and rose to the rank of captain. He served
overseas for 18 months in India, Burma and China in Signal
Intelligence.

*Absence Explained

 

 -2-

In the four years after his discharge from the Army,
Professor O'Donnell was a caseworker and chief social worker
at the VA hospital in Sheridan, Wyoming, and a research social
worker in the NIMH Health Center in Phoenix. Later, as Chief
of the Social Work Service at the U.S. Public Health Service
Hospital in Lexington, Kentucky, he was an excellent adminis-
trator and developed effective relationships with many patients.
Also, during this period he found time to continue graduate
work and earn his doctorate in Sociology. He was the first
Chief of the Social Science Section at the Addiction Research
Center in Lexington. Serving in that role from 1961 to 1968,
he recruited an excellent staff and developed a well—recognized
unit. From 1968 to 1969, Dr. O'Donnell was Chief of Research
Section at the NIMH Clinical Research Center in Lexington, and
from 1970 until his death, he was Professor of Sociology at
the University of Kentucky.

In high school and college, Jack received a number of
awards and honors; for example, he won a Greek poetry reading
and translating contest. In 1962, he was awarded the Public
Health commendation medal. In 1979, he received the Distin-
guished Alumni Award, which is offered annually by the Sociology
faculty of the University of Kentucky for meritorious achieve—
ment. During his distinguished career, Dr. O'Donnell received
several major research grants from the National Institute on
Mental Health, the Special Action Office for Drug Abuse Preven-
tion, and the National Institute on Mental Health, the Special
Action Office for Drug Abuse Prevention, and the National
Institute on Drug Abuse.

Throughout his many years of government and university
service, Professor O'Donnell was a highly trusted and valued
consultant to the National Institute on Mental Health, the
National Institute on Drug Abuse; the Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and
Mental Health Administration; the White House Office on Drug
Abuse Policy; and many other research organizations. He was in—
vited to present papers at World Health Organization conferences
held in London and Geneva and to help organize and present papers
for the international workshops on drug abuse held by the Dahlem
Konferenzen in Berlin. In addition, he was a member of the Board
of Directors of the Committee on Problems of Drug Dependence and
served on the editorial boards of Drug and Alcoholism Review and
Evaluation and the Health Profession.

 

 

In addition to publishing a number of articles, John
O'Donnell co-edited two major books: Narcotic Addiction, with
John Ball in 1966 and the Handbook on Drug Abuse, with Robert
DuPont and Avram Goldstein in 1979. He was the author of a
monograph entitled Narcotic Addicts in Kentucky, published in
1969, and the senior author of Young Men and Drugs: A Nationwide
Survey, which appeared in 1976. These monographs are considered
classics in the field of drug abuse.

 

 

 

 

 -3-

Jack was devoted to his family. He and his wife, Estelle,
shared many happy years together. Seldom did Jack ever mention
an award or an achievement, but he was willing to relate, with
justifiable fatherly pride, the accomplishments of his son and
daughter, John and Kitty, each now also university professors.
Professor O'Donnell had a brilliant mind, but the characteristic
that perhaps most distinguished him was his integrity; he never
wavered in his quest for excellence. A man with firm convictions,
he nevertheless could recognize the views of others and differ
with them without allowing such differences to undermine mutual
respect. He spent a great deal of time reviewing research pro-
posals and early drafts of manuscripts, and his critical insight
and honest advice helped many researchers in the field of drug
abuse. Yet, he was never too busy for students. Though widely
acclaimed as a researcher, he devoted many, many hours to prepara—
tion for his classes——for him to enter a classroom less than
fully prepared was unthinkable. Integrity, honesty, intelligence,
commitment to sound scholarship, devotion to his family, and
humility characterized this man of many talents.

He was also a private man. Until his death, his colleagues
were unaware that his father had died when he was 14 and that
Jack helped to support his mother and four younger siblings by
taking a job as a delivery boy. As one of his sisters observed,
Jack had to be serious at an early age. While he worked hard all
of his life, John O'Donnell was cheerful, witty and possessed of
a contagious zest for both good living and scholarly work of
the highest caliber. He will be sorely missed by his university
colleagues and students, and by many professional coworkers.

The Department of Sociology, College of Arts and Sciences
and Agriculture recommends that this resolution be spread upon
the minutes of the University Senate and that copies be sent to
the members of Professor O'Donnell's family.

(Prepared by Willis A. Sutton, Jr., Chairman, Department of Sociology)

Chairman Krislov directed that the Resolution be made a part of these minutes and
that copies be provided to members of the immediate family. The Senators were asked to
stand for a moment of silence in tribute and respect to Dr. John A. O'Donnell.

Chairman Krislov made the following remarks:

"I have a number of remarks. We did not have a meeting
in November and that accounts for many of them. The first item
is that I am happy to announce the Senate Council is able to
comply with the mandate of the Senate to establish a Resource
Allocation Subcommittee. The committee will be chaired by
Professor Patrick of the Accounting Department. In addition to
his accounting experience, Professor Patrick has been involved
for about a decade as a consultant to hospital containment
cost committees. We feel that experience would be particu—
larly relevant to the Resource Allocation Subcommittee. The
other members of the committee who were named by the Academic
Organization and Structure Committee are Donald Shannon,

 

 _4_

Business Administration; Donald Leigh, Engineering; Paul Forand,
Slavic and Oriental Languages; Samuel Scott, Medicine; and
Clinton Collins, Education. The Subcommittee, to remind you,
'is expected to formulate a series of budetary questions of con-
cern to the faculty and present them to the administration.'
Hopefully, the committee will be in a position to do that
sometime next year. You should be receiving some information
from that committee.

The second item is the General Studies Committee. For
some time the General Studies Committee, which handles course
requests and course changes, has indicated that it would be
desirable to have a look at the entire program. The Under—
graduate Council agreed with the General Studies Committee,
and asked the Council to establish a committee to review the
program. Professor A. L. Coleman of the Political Science
Department has been named Chairman. We solicit your views
as to the composition and membership of the committee and
would appreciate it if you would indicate that either orally
or in writing because we would like to get the committee
operating sometime in 1980. We look forward to a report some—
time in 1980—81.

The third item concerns athletic events during finals
week. Several of you have written to the Council about this
matter. Some of you indicated, and correctly so, that the
issue had come up before and at that time there was an indi-
cation from the Athletic Department that they would schedule
around the finals week. Unfortunately, their schedules are
made many years in advance and apparently this was one of
those cases, and we hope this problem will not occur again
in the 1980's.

The fourth item, Privilege and Tenure, is action that
the Council will be sending to the administration. Some of
you know that the Privilege and Tenure Committee had had an
unusual number of appeals last year. Many of the appeals
evolved around a single item. The chairman of that committee
recommended to us a change in the existing procedures. The
present non—tenured faculty member whose file has not been
forwarded by the Dean of the College cannot ask that his file
go to the appropriate Vice President. The Dean ends the con-
sideration and cuts off any review by the Vice President. The
administration takes the position there is no requirement that
the file be forwarded and the rules would tend to support
that position. The Council is proposing to the administration
that in the final year of the non—tenured faculty member he
may request that his file be forwarded in spite of a nega-
tive recommendation by the Dean.

 

 The fifth item concerns Senate Council Membership. I want
to announce that Professor Ivey will be returning to the Council
in January. The elections are over and Professor Robe,
Professor Sears and Professor Rees will be joining the Council
in January, 1980.

The Senate Christmas Party is on Tuesday from 4:00 to
6:00 p.m. in the King Alumni House.

The last item has to do with another recommendation of
the Senate regarding medical disability which went to the
administration last year. I have been told by President
Singletary that they will have a proposal sometime next year.

Those are my remarks on the action of the Council and
what we have been doing while the Senate has not been meeting."

The Chairman recognized Professor William Wagner for a motion from the Senate
Council. Professor Wagner, on behalf of the University Senate Council, recommended
approval of the proposed addition to University Senate Rules, Admissions Standards for
the Honors Program. This proposal was circulated to members of the University Senate
under date of November 28, 1979. The Chair recognized Professor Betts for a presentation
on the proposal.

Professor Betts spoke to the Senate as follows:

"As many of you may know the catalog statements on the
program up to last year indicated nothing about quality of
performance or about admissions standards into the program.
Therefore, the Senate last year approved establishing a cer—
tain grade point average. Although this information was cir—
culated to the students in the form of brochures, it was
never put into the catalog. I suggested to Professor Bryant,
in a statement to the Undergraduate Committee, that the
composite ACT score be changed from 27 to 26 or better. The
26 is equivalent to an 88 percentile rating. I am not sure
how many of you are aware of the size of the program or the
number of students annually entering it. For this reason I
have put together some statistical information which I will
leave that will give you some idea of the performance of the
students. In 1978 the number of students entering the Univer—
versity as freshmen with ACT of 26 or better was 524. Of-
that number 166 entered the Honors Program. Approximately
one—third of the students eligible for the Honors Program do
enter that program."

There were no questions or discussion and the proposed change passed unanimously and
reads as follows:

Background:

Although there is an admissions statement in the 1979—80 University
catalog, there is no indication that the Senate approved that standard.
The proposed change alters the catalog slightly. The proposed stan—
dard has been approved by the Honors Program, the Undergraduate
Council, the Senate Committee on Special Teaching Programs and the
Senate Council.

 

 ageless:

To be admitted to the Sa ;;3 Program, entering freshmen should generally
have a high school grade point average of 3.5 or better and a composite
ACT score of 26 or better. Students entering the program after the
freshman year must have a cumulative university grade point average of
3.0 or better.

Current Statement in the Catalog: 1979—80

 

In order to be admitted, students generally must have a high school
grade point average of 3.5 or better and a composite ACT score of 27
or better.

Note: The proposal will be forwarded to the Rules Committee for
codification. Implementation Date: Spring, 1980.

The Chairman recognized Professor William Wagner for a motion from the Senate
Council. Professor Wagner, on behalf of the University Senate Council, recommended
approval of the proposed change in University Senate Rules, Section VI, 4.6, last para-
graph, dealing with communications regarding suspension of students. This proposal was
circulated to members of the University Senate under date of November 28, 1979. The
Chair said that he wished to testify very solemnly that Ombudsman Pival came into his
office in July of this year and said she had inherited the problem of suspension of stu—
dents from the previous Ombudsman. Everybody was agreed this was the way to handle
it, and she proceeded. The Chair said that the proposal had nothing to do with any of
the difficulties currently on American campuses with foreign students.

The Chairman recognized Ombudsman Pival for an explanation. Professor Pival's
remarks follow:

“In June when I talked with Jane Emanuel about the
recurring problems of the Ombudsman's Office, one item she
mentioned was a need to set up some kind of machinery to
notify the appropriate office of foreign students suspended
from the University. I went to Paul Sears and he informed
me that it would require a change in the Senate Rules. The
rule before you is the result of about three weeks of con—
ferring with various people on campus. Because there is also
a need to notify the Community Colleges of suspension, the
Vice President of Community Colleges is included, but this
latter amendement applies to all University of Kentucky
students. There was no intent to persecute any student."

There were no questions or discussion and the proposed change passed unanimously
and reads as follows:

Rationale:

There is a special problem involving foreign students suspended or dis—
missed from the University for academic offenses. As a result of their
non-student status, they are no longer entitled to the student visa
legitimized by the University of Kentucky.

 

 _7_

The Director of International Student Affairs validates such visas, but
without immediate knowledge of a suspension or dismissal he/she is unable
to take the necessary steps to keep the University in compliance with
federal immigration laws.

A second problem involves the Community Colleges and all students who
are under academic sanction. According to University Senate Rule 5,
3.1.4 (a) l:

A student who is under academic suspension may not
enroll in any courses offered by the University of
Kentucky, nor take any examination for University
of Kentucky credit while on academic suspension or
probation.

This, of course, includes those offered by Community Colleges. Several

times in the last few years, students have lost enrollment money and credits
earned because Community College officials were not notified of the students'
suspension and students were allowed to enroll. Proper notification could
alleviate this problem in the future.

Revision: (additions underlined)

VI, 4.6 Notice of action taken under (a) or (b) must be sent by the
President to the student by certified mail, with copies to
the instructor, department chairman and dean of the college
where the offense occurred, dean of student's college, appro—
priate academic vice president, Vice President for Community
Colleges, Registrar, Academic Ombudsman and chairman of the
University Appeals Board. In the case of foreign students,

a copy should also be sent to the Director of International
Student Affairs.

The proposal was made by the Ombudsman, and approved by the Student Affairs
Committee and the Senate Council.

Note: The proposed change will be forwarded to the Rules Committee for
codification. Implementation Date: Immediately.

The Chairman recognized Professor William Wagner for a motion from the Senate
Council. Professor Wagner, on behalf of the University Senate Council, recommended
approval of the proposed addition to the University Senate Rules for a Double Major
across College lines. This proposed addition had been circulated to members of the
University Senate under date of November 28, 1979.

The Chair recognized Professor Sands for an explanation. Professor Sands made the
following remarks:

"The proposal will benefit a relatively small number of
students: the good students, the ambitious students, and those who
want to combine two areas of study. Some of the areas we
have thought about are combinations of English and education,
engineering and mathematics, engineering and some of the
sciences. Dean Drennon suggested this mechanism, that
would require students to fulfill college requirements in only

 

 one of the colleges. The student must declare one major as the
principal major, fulfill the departmental and college re—

quirements in the principal major, and fulfill only the departmental
requirements for the second major."

The floor was opened for questions and discussion. Professor Jewell asked if this
was partly necessitated by the splitting of the Department of Communications from the
College of Arts and Sciences where there had been double majors. Dean Sands said that
it was but there were other examples such as mathematics and engineering. Dean Langston
asked if the teaching credentials were affected in any way. Dean Sands responded that
the teaching credentials might be something different. He added that the proposal was
talking about the student who wanted a double major. There were no more questions and
the proposal passed unanimously. It reads as follows:

Background:

This proposal, approved by the Arts and Sciences Faculty Council, the
Undergraduate Council and the Senate Council, permits double majors
across college lines. The plan attempts to distinguish between the
degree requirements of a program and the more general requirements
mandated by a college. The student must designate one of the majors
as a principal major, and that is the major whose college requirements
must be fulfilled. Only those requirements specifically listed for
the second major need be satisfied.

Some of the mechanisms of the double major are left purposely vague.

It seems adequate in the statement of the program to stipulate generally
that the requirements of each program and of the principal college should
be satisfied. Procedures for handling the details can be developed by
the colleges.

Proposal:

1) A student may earn a single baccalaureate degree with a double
major in two different colleges by:

a) Designating one of the majors as the principal major.

b) Completing the departmental or program requirements for
the principal major.

c) Completing the degree requirements of the college in
which the principal major is located.

Completing the specific departmental requirements for

the second major. These second major requirements shall
be delineated by the second department, and approved by
the college of the second department, by the Undergraduate
Council, and by the University Senate; these requirements
may include whatever components of its college degree re—
quirements the department considers essential.

Completing the University General Studies requirements.

 

 The primary responsibility for advising a student in a double

major program shall rest with the principal major department.

An advisor from the second department shall provide assistance
where necessary.

a) The diploma shall indicate the degree from the college of
the principal major.

b) The transcript shall indicate the degree and both majors.

4) Double majors may not be available to all departments. See
your college advisor.

Note: The proposal will be forwarded to the Rules Committee for codification.
Implementation Date: Spring, 1980.

The Chairman reminded the Senators of the Christmas party on Tuesday, December 11
at 4:00 p.m.

The meeting adjourned at 3:40 p.m.

Martha M. Ferguson
Recording Secretary

 

 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY
LEX!NGTO‘L KENTUCKY 40506

UNIVERSITY SENATE COUNCIL
Io ADMINISTRATION BUILDING

November 28, 1979

Members, University Senate
University Senate Council

AGENDA ITEM: University Senate Meeting, Monday,
December 10, 1979. Proposed change in University Senate
Rules, Section VI, 4. 6, last paragraph, dealing with com-
munications regarding suspension of students.

Rationale:

There is a special problem involving foreign students suspended or dis—
missed from the University for academic offenses. As a result of their
non-student status, they are no longer entitled to the student visa legitimized
by the University of Kentucky.

The Director of International Student Affairs validates such visas, but with-
out immediate knowledge of a suspension or dismissal he/she is unable to
take the necessary steps to keep the Univers ity in compliance with federal
immigration laws.

A second problem involves the Community Colleges and all students who
are under academic sanction. According to University Senate Rule V,
3. 1. 4(a) 1:

A student who is under academic suspension may not

enroll in any courses offered by the University of Kentucky,
nor take any examination for University of Kentucky credit
while on academic suspension or probation.

This, of course, includes those offered by Community Colleges. Several
times in the last few years, students have lost enrollment money and credits
earned because Community College officials were not notified of the students’
suspension and students were allowed to enroll. Proper notification could
alleviate this problem in the future.

[continued]

AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY UNIVERSITY

 

 Paige 2

Senate Agenda Item: Section VI, 4. 6, last paragraph
November 28, 1979

Suggested Revision: (proposed additions underlined)

VI, 4. 6

Notice of action taken under (a) or (b) must be sent by the
President to the student by certified mail, with cepies to the
instructor, department chairman and dean of the college Where
the offense occurred, dean of student's college, appropriate
academic vice president, Vice President for Community Col—
leges, Registrar, Academic Ombudsman and chairman of the
University Appeals Board. In the case of foreign students, a
copy should also be sent to the Director of International Stu-
dent Affairs.

\l, 4,4,
'r‘ '1‘ 'l"

The proposal was made by the Ombudsman, and approved by the Student
Affairs Committee and the Senate Council.

Note: If approved, the Rules Committee will make the appropriate codifica-
tion effective at the time of passage.

 

 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY
LEXINGTO'L KENTUCKY 40506

UNIVERSITY SENATE COUNCIL
10 ADMINISTRATION aubemc

November 28, 1979

Members, University Senate
University Senate Council

AGENDA ITEM: University Senate Meeting, Monday,
December 10, 1979. Proposed addition to University Senate
Rules, admissions standards for the Honors Program, to be
codified by the Rules Committee.

Background:

Although there is an admissions statement in the 1979—80 University catalog,
there is no indication that the Senate approved that standard. The proposed
change alters the catalog slightly. The proposed standard has been approved
by the Honors Program, the Undergraduate Council, the Senate Committee
on'Special Teaching Programs and the Senate Council

"~ v
_r , ‘3

('/‘ x)”

Proposed: [43/ _‘ Til“; X if“ ['11 ”C
' ; \ C t” \ _
@Qto be admitted‘ entering freshmen should generally
have a high school grade point average of 3. 5 or better and a
composite ACT score of 26 or better. Students entering the
program after the freshman year must have a cumulative uni—
versity grade point average of 3. O or better.

Current Statement in. the Catalog: 1979—80

Elirordei“ to be admitted, students generally must have a high

school grade—point average of 3. 5 or better and a composite
ACT score of 27 or better.

Note: If approved, the above proposal will be forwarded to the Rules Commit-
teeto be codified for inclusion in the University Senate Rules.

A” Hum. “munmnlul . IIHHII "Kalli

 

 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY
LEXINGTO‘I. KENTUCKY 40506

UNIVERSITY SENATE COUNCIL
Io ADMINISTRATION BUILDING

November 28, 1979

Members, University Senate
University Senate Council

AGENDA ITEM: University Senate Meeting, Monday,
December 10, 1979. Proposal for a Double Major across
college lines.

Background:

This proposal, approved by the Arts and Sciences Faculty Council, the
Undergraduate Council and the Senate Council, permits double majors
across college lines. The plan attempts to distinguish between the de—
gree requirements of a program and the more general requirements
mandated by a college. The student must designate one of the majors
as a principal major, and that is the major whose college requirements
must be fulfilled. Only those requirements specifically listed for the
second major needbe satisfied.

Some cf the mechanisms of the double major are left purposely vague.

It seems adequate in the statement of the program to stipulate generally
that the requirements of each program and of the principal college should
be satisfied. Procedures for handling the details can be developed by
the colleges.

Proposal for a Double Major Between Colleges:

 

1) A student may earn a single baccalaureate degree with a double
major in two different colleges by:

a) Designating one of the majors as the principal major.

b) Completing the departmental or program requirements
for the principal major.

c) Completing the degree requirements of the college in
which the principal major is located.

[continued]

AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY UNIVERSITV
‘J

 

 Page 2
Senate Agenda Item: December 10, 1979 Double Major Proposal
November 28, 1979

d) Completing the specific departmental requirements for
the second major. These second major requirements
shall be delineated by the second department, and approved
by the college of the second department, by the Undergrad—
uate Council, and by the University Senate; these require—
ments may include whatever components of its college de-
gree requirements the department considers essential.

e) Completing the University General Studies requirements.
The primary responsibility for advising a student in a double major
program shall rest with the principal major department. An advisor

from the second department shall provide assistance where necessary.

a) The diploma shall indicate the degree from the college
of the principal major.

is) The transcript shall indicate the degree and both majors.

Double majors may not be available to all departments. See your
College advisor.

If approved, the above proposal will be forwarded to the Rules Com-
mittee to be codified for inclusion in the Senate Rules.