xt7vt43j1h8f https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7vt43j1h8f/data/mets.xml University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate Kentucky University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate 1987-09-14  minutes 2004ua061 English   Property rights reside with the University of Kentucky. The University of Kentucky holds the copyright for materials created in the course of business by University of Kentucky employees. Copyright for all other materials has not been assigned to the University of Kentucky. For information about permission to reproduce or publish, please contact the Special Collections Research Center. University of Kentucky. University Senate (Faculty Senate) records Minutes (Records) Universities and colleges -- Faculty University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, September 14, 1987 text University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, September 14, 1987 1987 1987-09-14 2020 true xt7vt43j1h8f section xt7vt43j1h8f LNMVERSHY OF KENTUCKY

LEXINGTON. KENTUCKY 40506-0032

UNWER$TYSENATECOUNCm 1 September 1987
10 ADMINISTRATION BUILDING

Members, University Senate

The University Senate will meet in regular session on Monday,
September 14, 1987, at 3:00 p.m. in ROOM 115 of the Nursing Building
(CON/HSLC). PLEASE NOTE: The Nursing Building is across Rose Street from
the University Hospital and is connected with the Medical Plaza. Room 115
is at the north end of the building.

AGENDA:
Minutes.
Remarks by President David Roselle.
Resolutions.
Introduction of Senate Officers and Committee Chairs.

Academic Ombudsman's Report for the 1986-87 Academic Year: Dr.
Charles Byers.

Lw’
Introduction of new Academic Ombudsman.LL ”( [“1 t H ‘ ')

Chairman's Announcements and Remarks.
ACTION ITEMS:

a. Proposed Changes in University Senate Rules, Section V - 1.5.2,
Grade I. (Circulated under date of 26 August 1987).

 

Proposed addition to University Senate Rules, Section V -
4.4.5, Professional Degrees. (Circulated under date of 25
August 1987.)

 

 

Randall Dahl
Secretary

Note: If you are unable to attend this meeting, please contact Ms. Martha
Sutton (7—7155) in advance. Thank you.

/cet
0678C

AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY UNIVERSITY

 

 MINUTES OF THE UNIVERSITY SENATE, SEPTEMBER l4, l987

The University Senate met in regular session at 3:00 p.m., Monday, September
l4, l987, in Room ll5 of the College of Nursing/Health Sciences Building.

William E. Lyons, Chairman of the Senate Council, presided.

Members absent: Richard Angelo, Charles E. Barnhart, Susan Bean*, Raymond
Betts, David Bingham*, Tex Lee Boggs, Jeffery A. Born*, Ben Carr, Edward A.
Carter, Michael Cibull*, Richard R. Clayton*, Donald Coleman, Emmett Costich*,
C. J. Cremers, Richard C. Domek, Jr., James Freeman*, Ann Griesser, Andrew
Grimes, Ottfried J. Hahn, Zafar Hasan*, Freddie Hermann*, Ronald Hoover, Raymond
R. Hornback, Alfred S. L. Hu, Mehran Jahed, Robert G. Lawson, Gerald Lemons,
William C. Lubawy, Robert Murphy, Michael T. Nietzel, Rosanne Palermo, Philip C.
Palmgreen*, John J. Piecoro*, Robin D. Powell, John M. Rogers, Edgar L. Sagan,
Karyll N. Shaw, Carol B. Stelling*, Scott Ward*, Cyndi Weaver, James H. Wells,
Charles T. Wethington, Carolyn A. Williams*, Gene Williams, W. Douglas Wilson,
Peter Winograd, and Constance L. Wood.

Chairman William Lyons introduced President David Roselle as follows:

"It is customary that the Senate invite the President of
the University, who is also President of the University Senate,
to address the Senate at its first meeting of each academic
year. It gives me great pleasure that our new President, David
Roselle, has agreed to continue that custom again this year.
Furthermore, it is especially gratifying to me to be able to ask
him to come this year particularly in view of the fact that I
believe he has made an outstanding effort to communicate with
the faculty, the Faculty Senate, and the Senate Council on a
wide variety of matters since his arrival on campus this past
June. Since most, if not all members of the Senate, have had an
opportunity to meet Dr. Roselle at one of the recent Convoca-
tions that have been held or during his many sojourns across
campus, I will not give an extended introduction today.

Instead, let me simply say that it gives me great pleasure to
welcome, on behalf of the University Senate, President David
Roselle.”

Dr. Roselle's remarks follow:

”During these early days of my Presidency, I have been
giving three different speeches. In talks to the general public
and to the alumni of the University I've been presenting some—
thing of a report to them as stockholders in the corporation
known as the University of Kentucky. I thus report on the
achievements of the faculty, the achievements of the students,
and the achievements of the University. I tell something of our
needs but concentrate on our achievements. The emphasis is on
achievements. In the talk given to legislative people, and
other decision makers, the achievements are mentioned but the
emphasis tends to be a little bit more on our needs.

*Absence explained.

 

 Finally, I have talked to members of the faculty about
opportunities, goals and responsibilities of the University of
Kentucky.

Today I want to present a hybrid of those various talks and
see if it is possible to generate some questions.

When I began the presidency at the University of Kentucky,
I found a great many things already in progress. For example,
the selective admissions policy that was instituted recently has
seen a rise in the academic preparedness of its entering stu—
dents. In the last four years, the ACT composite for the
entering freshmen went from 19.8 to 22.4. This is substantially
above the national average of about l9 and not incomparable to
scores found in certain premier institutions.

The Community College System has done a really excellent
job in providing accessible and affordable high quality higher
education opportunities for Kentucky residents. I want to
underline that point because I know that Community College
people are not represented here today. The Community Colleges
are good institutions and much at the University of Kentucky
depends upon continued good relationships between the Community
Colleges and the Lexington Campus. I want those of us located in
Lexington to make our partnership with the l4 Community Colleges
work all the better. That is a very important issue for the
University of Kentucky.

The University has identified a number of Centers of
Excellence for development during the last planning process;
people throughout the state are very supportive of the agricul-
tural programs at the University; the hOSpital operation is well
managed and in good financial condition; private support to the
University of Kentucky has increased in the last several years;
tuition and fees appear to be fair and responsibly set.

The University's research efforts received a real boost at
the end of last year through the Centers, through increased
support for the graduate assistants, through the academic
equipment which is being purchased from the 20 million dollar
bond issue approved during the last legislative session, and
through acquisition of the super computer.

The University of Kentucky has recently been characterized
as a Research University I by the Carnegie Commission. These
are universities that by their definitions are committed to
graduate education and which give a high priority to scholarship
and research. To be classified as a Research University I, the
university must receive annually at least 33.5 million dollars
in federal support from research and development and award at
least 50 Ph.D. degrees per year. There are 70 of these institu—
tions nationally and 45 of them are public. I think all of us
at the University of Kentucky can be proud that our institution
is counted in that group.

 

 In sum, the University has a good student body, an academ—
ically good and enthusiastic faculty, a well managed and
fiscally sound operation--lean, but fiscally sound—-and an
exciting building program.

By contrast, the University is not without problems. First
of all, there needs to be a realization that the quality of an
educational institution is determined by the quality of the
faculty. There is no great institution that does not have a
great faculty. Competitive salaries are needed to recruit and
retain faculty of quality. This year, because of a budget
reduction, the University gave a 4 percent salary increase
rather than a 6 or 7 percent which was planned. The University
of Kentucky pays its faculty about $3500 less on average than
does academically comparable institutions. That's a serious
problem. The University cannot hope to be better than its
faculty.

Staff salaries are a problem also. Our staff in Lexington
is paid at about 90 percent of the market average.

The current revenue picture of the state and its implica-
tion for higher education are disturbing.

As we look through the planning process and as I talk to
people on this campus, it appears to me that it is the infra—
structure of the University, the basic support of the institu-

tion, salaries, operating expenses, the library books and
journals, maintenance and facilities, that we have to deal with.

The greater share of the budget for the next biennium deals
with these problems. In particular, faculty and staff salaries
are identified as the highest priority for the University of
Kentucky.

Let me tell you a little bit about where I would like to
see this institution go for the next several years. I want us
to become nationally recognized for the quality of our scholar-
ship, our research and graduates. I believe that the University
of Kentucky can become a graduate institution of the first
rank. This institution is already a rank I institution accord-
ing to the Carnegie Commission, but we should aspire to be a
graduate institution of the highest quality. Through the
Community College System we should provide access to Kentuckians
wishing to have higher education. We want to attract an academ—
ically talented and a diverse undergraduate student body and see
those students through to graduation. We want the faculty of
this institution in its relationships with students to be deal-
ing in academic success, and to have to deal much less with
academic failure. We want to stimulate the development and
enhancement of our graduate professional and research programs.
We should emphasize and extend our programs of sponsored re—
search. Ne ought to be looking to enhance our service to the

citizens of the Commonwealth. We should create the environment
internally to foster faculty activity which cuts across depart-

 

 mental and disciplinary lines and we should develop computa—
tional and communications systems which will provide for a rapid
transfer of information to and from all points.

We want to manage the size of the undergraduate student
body at the Lexington campus, while at the same time increasing
the quality of that student body. We want to be an active par-
ticipant with other groups in Kentucky for improved educational
attainment. We plan to seek partnerships with industry, busi—
ness and governmental agencies from other schools.

Computing and communications will play an increasingly
important role at the University of Kentucky. In general,
equipment and man interface will be an increasingly important
issue. We need equipment in suport of classroom teaching,
laboratory instruction, field use and research.

We will take responsibility for finding resources to meet
many of the University's needs. We should be willing to
consider reallocation of resources now available to the
University. We should also recognize and emphasize the
importance of non- traditional sources of support for our
programs. We need to recognize that this institution and others
like it will have to provide more of their own support than has
earlier been the case.

I don't pretend for a moment that private resources can

ever completely replace public support for a public institu-
tion. Such funds should, however, be viewed as the margin of
excellence and we should strive to obtain such funding. We
should also recognize that in higher education in l987 we are
dealing with a sense of disappointment of the public. The
public believe education leaders have been unable to cope with
change and that our students are being shortchanged. There has
been a drop in public confidence in the educational system.
Accordingly, the first agenda item for the University of
Kentucky is to establish public confidence in our activities.
It is clear enough how we do that: teach our classes well;
succeed in programs of outreach; continue to gain recognition
for programs of scholarship; develop confidence that our insti—
tution is managed well. Anything less will not get us the
public confidence that we require.

We have all been reading that the current generation of
Americans will be the first to leave school less well prepared
and less well educated than were their parents. And we have
read a lot of criticism in the many assessments of American
higher education. The one that has really stuck with me is the
"Nation at risk" where we read the following ”If a foreign
nation were thought to be responsible for the state of the edu-
cational system in the United States, we would consider it an
act of war.” Such statements are bound to underline public
confidence in the enterprise.

The question for all of us at the University of Kentucky,
and most especially the question for faculty, is ”What are we

 

 going to do about it?" How do we cope with the problem of
American higher education in l987? How can we attempt to deal
with the information explosion? How can we strengthen the
University's abilities to deliver a first rate education to the
sons and daughters of the Commonwealth of Kentucky? What are

the best strategies for strengthening and supporting our faculty?

We must realize that there needs to be endorsements of tra—
ditional academic values as well as new methods for copy with
the information explosion. As far as the latter is concerned,
it is estimated that, at present, information is increasing at
an annual rate of about 40%. If our response as educators is
only to continue traditional methods of delivery of information,
then our curricula will be limited to a rapidly increasing
smaller percentage of the information base. On the other hand,
there is the option of extending the length of the curriculum to
correspond to the increase in knowledge. That strategy would,
of course, be a disappointment to the freshman class and their
parents. They would soon realize that the students would for—
ever remain students. Indeed, the longer those students were
enrolled in college, the further behind they would become.

We must not, it seems to me, place our students into a
situation in which their enthusiasm for learning is replaced by
a realization that all that matters is to survive our system.

We must teach our students that an educated person is one who
deals gracefully with his areas of ignorance. Therefore, we
must admit to ourselves and our students that the ability to
find and manage information should replace the ability to remem—
ber information as the criterion for success among our students.

Our goal as educators should be to separate in our curri-
culum that which is memory driven from that which is truly
conceptual and to emphasize the latter. We should also teach
human values. Our students need most to be able to relate
effectively to other human beings. And we should encourage a
renaissance of literature and history in our curriculum. Educa-
tion based only on current information is doomed to failure by
the sheer rush of new information. We need generalists whose
actions will be grounded on moral principles, humane values and
a sense of history.

Computation and communication offer the best hope to be
able to gain access to and manage information. We should, it
seems to me, stress in our education the importance of the com—
puter as the vehicle by which we can rationalize the previously
stated goal of replacing memory of information by the ability to
find and manage information. I should note, parenthetically,
that the potential of the computer to help manage information is
huge. I fully expect that its ultimate use in this regard will
be profound, long-lasting, and all encompassing. I believe that
in the future we will look to today's uses of the computer as
being as trivial as we now believe the following comment by a

college coed overheard recentl : She said that she ‘was
debugging her relationship wit her boyfriend.I

 

 Attending to improvements in the American education system
should surely be America's first priority. The tradition of our
country is one of strong belief in public education and, as
already noted, the education system is widely perceived to have
fallen on difficult times.

The University of Kentucky and its faculty and students
have an obligation to help education at all levels. But I want
here to talk mostly about items to keep in mind as we think
about how to get our own house in order. 30 I have set forth a
few of what John Nasbitt calls 'PBI's' —- for 'Partially Baked
Ideas.‘

If you like any of these ideas (and they are borrowed in
part from Nasbitt), we can later discuss how to fit them into a
strategic plan for the University. I do want to note that I
have an abiding faith that the ideas and goals of the University
are more important than is a strategic plan. Indeed, given the
wrong ideas and the wrong goals, a strategic plan only makes
going down the drain a bit more efficient.

What should be the objectives for the University of
Kentucky? In simplest terms, they should be to produce broadly
educated students and to foster a lot of excitement and fun in
the process. We should emphasize that it is commitment and not
authority that produces excellence. We should manage the
educational enterprise at the University of Kentucky not only by

the popular notion of MBWA ('Management by Walking Around'). We
want to do our business with persons excited about the educa-
tional process and there is no substitute for our vision of our
mission in bringing about that excitement.

ON TO MY PBIs:

Human resources are the University of Kentucky's competi-
tive edge. We can only attain excellence if we attract the
best minds to Lexington, put appropriate incentives in
place, and generously reward success.

Good people are going to become increasingly more scarce.
We all know about the changed demographics for students.
But staff and faculty will also be in short supply and will
have many other employment opportunities in our emerging
world economy.

Selective admissions will continue and the quality of the
student body will increase.

Middle management in the traditional sense will become
increasingly less important. The present role of middle
management (that of the gate keeper), will be replaced by
an increasing reliance on the computer. It is an observ—
able fact that the present replacement of middle management
by computation far exceeds the replacement of workers in
the manufacturing component of the national economy due to
automation.

 

 The new role for middle management will be as developers of
personnel. Note that I said "developers of personnel and
not "managers" of personnel.

Our faculty and our students will increasingly become
generalists instead of specialists. The ability to manage
information by use of computing will assist that trend.
The explosion of information will make resistance to that
trend futile.

The University will seek ways to assist the economic devel—
opment of Kentucky.

The University of Kentucky will deal effectively with ques-
tions related to comparable worth, affirmative action,
equal opportunity, etc. Simply put, I believe that one of
the greatest strengths of the Commonwealth of Kentucky and
the United States of America is our ethnic diversity. Our
University surely will be intelligent enough to extend
opportunities without regard to race, color or creed. The
citizens of the United States want to make commitments to
being fully involved members of our society and we need to
give them opportunities to do so. It simply should not
matter where members of the University of Kentucky
community come from as long as they are committed to where
they are going educationally or professionally. If you
attend a professional meeting, do so with the idea of
recruiting a minority faculty member -- come home and
suggest names to your department head.

The University will encourage the entrepreneurial
activities of the faculty and will embrace the industrial
notion of intrapreneurship. Many of you have already
learned of the University's efforts to capitalize to the
benefit of the University and the faculty on intellectual
properties. I believe that there will be future
initiatives with similar goals.

The incentives offered faculty, staff and students should
be increased. Such incentives have been an integral part
of faculty life at the University of Kentucky (merit pay,
returned overhead, tuition assistance, intellectual
property policies, consulting policies, etc.). I expect to
see incentives such as these strengthened.

The University will deal effectively with a continuing
decline in the percentage of state allocated support. It
will do so through innovative business practices. More
grant support for the faculty, continued reliance upon
private gifts and parnerships with business.

The University will continue its tradition of very
successful international programs. In particular, our
University will continue to host international students.
The number of visiting international faculty and industrial

 

 representatives will increase to keep pace with increases in our
research programs. Our faculty will continue to take an active
role in development projects and our students and faculty will
be encouraged to sudy other cultures both here and abroad.

We are now a good institution. We are also completely
dependent upon our faculty, staff and students in pursuit of our
further goals related to educational excellence. I urge every
member of our community to assume personal responsibility for
attainment of those goals. That will surely put excellence
within our grasp. Thank you very much."

President Roselle was given a round of applause.

In the question and answer period following President Roselle's remarks, a
Senator asked for examples of intrapreneurships. President Roselle said that
when smart managers got a good idea and in order to capitalize on that idea,
they would have to leave their employment and go somewhere else to capitalize on
the idea. There is a development in Dr. Royster's operation that should be to
the faculty before too long about intellectural properties and how to capitalize
on some of the faculty's activities. Senator McMahon said that the President
recognized the need for private funding for the University in light of the de-
crease in state support and asked if it was important to prioritize direction of
our fund raising efforts since there is a limited number of private dollars and
every time the Athletic Association tried to raise money for expanding the
stadium, which has virtually nothing to do with education, the dollar given
there might not eliminate a dollar given to the academic program but certainly
there are less dollars available for academic programs every time the Athletic
Department raises money for their activities. Senator McMahon wanted to know if
drives for the Athletic Department should be subordinated. President Roselle
understood Senator McMahon's point of view and responded that the University of
Kentucky had been quite successful in raising private money. It has done it in
the form of projects. He said there had been remarkable projects such as the
Markey Center and the Equine Center. The University has not embarked upon a
capital campaign but that would be looked at over the next few months. He felt
it was not a good situation for a new President to come to a university and
announce a capital campaign. He said that it is clear that some unification of
fund raising is a good issue. He said the University of Kentucky has a signi—
ficant record of raising private dollars.

Senator John Rea (French) said that the University should not rely on
grants, gifts, cooperation of industries and these things because they tend to
support certain areas and not others and would drive the University toward cer-
tain areas and away from other areas. He wondered where this would take the
University. President Roselle said the attitude of the University ought to be
that we glory in one another‘s successes. In his experience the curriculum of
faculty activities have been enrichly compensated for by conversations between
faculty who are users of technology, science or whatever the subject matter and
the meeting of the minds in how to apply such things. He recognized the concern
but in the practicality of matters there have been some very compensating fac—
tors. He felt that generally the faculty in such an institution as this was too
good to be driven away by industrial support.

Senator Malcolm Jewell (Political Science) stated that one of the trends at
Kentucky in the last ten years has been growing in the form of the legislature

 

 in decision making in budgetary decisions. Therefore, the views of the legis-
lators is not necessarily the views of the governors or gubernatorial candi—
dates. Since Dr. Roselle has met with legislators, Senator Jewell wondered if
Dr. Roselle had any impressions of the legislators' agendas or judgments about
affairs in general at the University. President Roselle said the legislators
want UK to succeed. They are worried now about the financial situation, but
nonetheless they certainly are supporters of the University of Kentucky. He has
met a majority of the legislators, and they are quite understanding of the
University. They are in a decision making role. His understanding of Kentucky
history is that it has been more a gubernatorial direction form of government.
He felt that made the administration of the University a little different. A
Senator asked President Roselle that with our relatively new emphasis on com—
puter science and information management, did he envision a University—wide
policy and mechanism whereby the individual faculty would have the computer
software and hardware which they deem most important for their own teaching and
reseach. He said people should not be forced to use the technology, but there
is some very sophisticated computing going on at the University. There is a
broad—band network being installed and there will be an increase in the number
of connections. In addition to that the University owns all the copper cable on
campus and the telephone system. There is also a cable TV network on campus.
There is good progess going on with the student records system and the President
is optimistic about both the kind of project being undertaken and the timetable
by which it is being taken. He said sharing software on campus was a big educa—
tional problem. He added that if a department or faculty member had grant money
for a computer, the University should not say what kind to buy but it should
give technical support.

Senator Jim Applegate (Communications) said the University of Kentucky had
never taken the lead in minority and other areas. The President said there had
been a press conference to announce a ten percent increase in enrollment. In
the preliminary figures there is a slight increase in the enrollment among
minorities on the Lexington campus. He felt educational leadership is the deci-
sion for the institution.

President Roselle was given a round of applause.

The minutes of the meetings of March 9, T987, and April 13, l987, were
approved as circulated.

Chairman Lyons recognized Loys Mather (Agriculture), Secretary of the Senate
Council, for a Resolution. Professor Mather read the following Resolution on
the former Chairman of the Senate Council, Professor Wilbur W. Frye.

RESOLUTION
Wilbur W. Frye

”By tradition, the University Senate, at its first meeting in
the academic year, recognizes its retiring presiding officer.
Professor Wilbur W. Frye has completed his term as Chairman of the
Senate Council and in that capacity presided over the meetings of the
Council as well as the Senate. This resolution is offered to commend
and thank him for his very capable and effective leadership and for
the cordial and dedicated manner in which he carried out his duties.

 

 After a year dealing with the University Studies Program,
Athletic Admissions, and the Pre—College Curriculum, many persons on
the Council expected l986—87 to be a relatively quiet year at least
in terms of the Council and Senate agendas. Such a view changed
quickly at Professor Frye's first meeting as chair. In helping the
Council prepare its agenda for the year, he led the Council through
an extensive and thorough review of its role in relation to the
Senate as well as to the University Community. Numerous issues, both
new and recurring, were identified. These included such matters as
the role of part—time instructors in the University, the pursuit and
recognition of excellence in the instructional program, the process
of reviews of educational units, and identification of an appropriate
faculty input into the academic planning and budget process. What
became clear at an early stage was the need to identify an appro-
priate mechanism or environment to foster communication between the
various faculty and administrative groups with which the Council felt
it needed to maintain contact-—and to do so at a time when the sche-
dules of the participants would permit.

Here, then, was born the idea of the Senate Council breakfast.
(After all, how many scheduling conflicts are there on campus at 7:30
a.m.?) Nhile simple in concept, the impact of these breakfast ses—
sions with the president, the three Chancellors, the chairmen of the
Senate committees, the mayor, and the Fayette County legislative
delegation has been immense and has challenged the Council to seri—
ously evaluate its mission, as well as that of the Senate, in
relation to the University and the Commonwealth. The results of
these sessions may not be immediately obvious to the members of the
Senate today, but they will be in the months ahead.

While Professor Frye clearly left his mark of leadership within
the Senate and the Senate Council, his most enduring legacy may well
be from service he rendered in related efforts. During his tenure as
chair-elect and chair, he also served as a member of the Committee on
the Future of the University and served as an elected faculty repre—
sentative on the Search Committee for the 9th President of the
University. Particularly regarding the Search Committee, he effec-
tively voiced the concerns and the viewpoint of the faculty and was
instrumental in assuring faculty input into the selection process.
Many persons here today participated in the University Forum or one
of the college forums. There may well have been more faculty in-
volvement and, ultimately, more information provided to the faculty
in the selection of our new president than for any of the other eight
presidents. Dr. Frye deserves a significant share of the credit for
this.

Professor Frye, please accept our sincere thanks for your
leadership, your dedication, and your faithful service to this Uni—
versity.”

Professor Frye was given a round of applause.

Chairman Lyons thanked Professor Frye for all his help and for pointing him
in the right direction. He hoped he could work as effectively with everyone in
the Senate as Professor Frye had demonstrated is possible.

 

 Chairman Lyons introduced the members of the Senate Council for this year
and asked them to stand: Professors Charles Ambrose, Medical Center; James
Applegate, Communications; Donald Leigh, Engineering; Loys Mather, Agriculture;
James Hells, Mathematics; Emmett Costich, Dentistry; Richard Angelo, Education;
and Jesse Neil, Physics. Ex officio members are: Professors Raymond Betts
(Honors Program); Mary Sue Coleman (Medical Center); and Cyndi Neaver, President
Student Government Association. The two student members are: Dave Allgood and
David White. The Senate Council members were given a round of applause.

The Chairs for the Senate Committees for the l987—88 academic year are
Professors Malcolm Jewell, Rules and Elections; Roger Anderson, Library
Committee; Loys Mather, Admissions and Academic Standards;