xt7zpc2t7t7r https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7zpc2t7t7r/data/mets.xml University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate Kentucky University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate 1974-09-09  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 9, 1974 text University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, September 9, 1974 1974 1974-09-09 2020 true xt7zpc2t7t7r section xt7zpc2t7t7r MINUTES OF THE UNIVERSITY SENATE, SEPTEMBER 9, 1974 3868

The University Senate met in regular session at 3:00 p.m., Monday, September
9, 1974, in the Court Room of the Law Building. Chairman Stanford Smith

Since there was a breakdown in the postal procedure and some members of
the University Senate did not receive the notice of the meeting until too late
to attend, the absent members are not being included as a part of these
Minutes and all Senators who were not at the meeting will be given an explained

The minutes of the meeting of May 6, 1974 were approved as circulated.

On behalf of the College of Pharmacy, Professor Harry B. Kostenbauder
presented Resolutions on the death of Dr. David E. Guttman. Following his
presentation the Senators were asked to stand for a moment of silence in tribute
and respect to Dr. Guttman and in acceptance of the Resolutions.


David E. Guttman, Professor in the Division of Pharmaceutics and
Pharmaceutical Analysis of the College of Pharmacy, died of cancer June
30, 1974. He is survived by his wife, Estelle, and his three children,
Steven, Jeremy, and Leslie.

A native of Calgary, Alberta, Canada, Dr. Guttman received his
Bachelor of Science in Pharmacy from the College of Pharmacy, University
of Alberta. His doctorate was attained at the University of Wisconsin,
in 1956.

Dr. Guttman became a well known person in American Pharmacy. He
served in pharmaceutical industry for several years at the Upjohn Company
and Smith Kline & French Laboratories, but he spent most of his professional
years as a pharmaceutical educator at Ohio State University, the State
University of New York at Buffalo, and the University of Kentucky. Author
of numerous scientific articles on pharmaceutics and pharmaceutical
analysis, Dr. Guttman was widely recognized as an authoritative teacher
and researcher in these areas. In addition to his great commitment to
teaching and research, an involvement from which he derived great satis—
faction and to which he gave much energy, was his work on the Revision
Committee of the United States Pharmacopeia; he served the United States
Pharmacopeia through this Committee, in various capacities, continuously
since 1962. Dr. Guttman was an active participant on various committees
of the Conference of Teachers of the American Association of Colleges
of Pharmacy. He was a member of the Executive Committee of the Academy
of Pharmaceutical Sciences; and, he had served on the Committee on Analytical
Profiles in the Pharmaceutical Analysis and Control Section, and as
Chairman of the Basic Pharmaceutics Section of the Academy.

Dr. Guttman was widely known in American scientific pharmacy. He
was respected by those who knew him not only as an exceptionally able
scientist and educator, but as a fine, warm and genial person. As a
tribute to this beloved colleague and friend, and to further the science
to which he contributed so effectively, an effort will be made to establish
at Kentucky the David E. Guttman Lectures, to be given annually by prominent
pharmaceutical scientists and educators.





Minutes of the University Senate, September 9, 1974 — cont

Thus, it is with great regret that we mark the death of this
fine gentleman and outstanding scientist. The faculty of the College
of Pharmacy wishes to express to Mrs. Guttman and the children its
deep sympathy and sorrow in losing Dr. David E. Guttman as a colleague
and friend.

Mr. Chairman, the Faculty of the College of Pharmacy respectfully
asks that the University Senate appropriately note the loss of this member
of the University's scholarly community and that these sentiments be
spread upon the minutes of this meeting of the University Senate, and asks
further that a copy of the same be sent to Mrs. Guttman and the children.

Chairman Smith made the following introductory remarks:

It has been traditional at the first meeting of the Senate each fall
to introduce to this body a variety of individuals. Perhaps the most
important group of individuals are those who are newly elected Senators.
We would be pleased if those individuals who have just been elected to
the Senate would please rise and be recognized by their colleagues. It
is a pleasure to welcome all of you back and particularly a pleasure to
welcome new Senators to this body. You may not know from reading the
rules and regulations -— it is not always obvious to us in the course
of our deliberations —— that this body legally, is one of the most
powerful University Senates anywhere in the world. You assume a rather
august responsibility and considerable honor by being elected by your
colleagues. It is a pleasure to welcome you and we look forward to
working with you over the next several years.

There are a number of groups and individuals who are responsible
for the day-to-day operation of this body and are responsible for the
preparation of those documents that ultimately reach the floor of the
Senate. I would like to introduce to you now those members of your
leadership so that you may recognize them and, as the occasion warrants,
transmit business to them. As you know, the Senate is directed, in
an executive sense, by the Senate Council which has an elected Chairman,
and has an office which is located in the Administration Building. I
am Stan Smith, Chairman of the Senate Council, through December, 1974.
There are, in addition, the following members of the Senate Council:

Constance Wilson, College of Social Professions

Robert Ogletree, College of Education

Stephen Diachun, Department of Plant Pathology

Joseph Krislov, Department of Economics, who is chairman-elect
of the Senate Council, and will assume the chairmanship January
1, 1975

William Wagner, Department of Chemistry, who is serving a one—
year term replacing Malcolm Jewell who is on leave

Fred Zechman, Department of Physiology and Biophysics

Roger Eichhorn, College of Engineering, and Secretary of the
Senate Council

Robert W. Rudd, Department of Agricultural Economics

Paul Sears, Department of Chemistry, who is an ex officio member
of the Senate Council in his capacity as a faculty voting member
of the Board of Trustees

Michael Adelstein, Department of English, serving as ex officio
member of the Senate Council in his capacity as a faculty voting
member of the Board of Trustees

 Minutes of the University Senate, September 9, 1974 — cont 3870

David Mucci, fig officio member, as President of the Student Body

Bette Dollase, College of Arts and Sciences, elected voting student

Rebecca Westerfield, College of Law, elected voting student member

The Senate Council meets weekly, and sometimes more often. This
semester they will be meeting on Wednesday afternoons at 3:30. Those
meetings are normally held in the old Board Room of the Administration
Building. The Senate Council meetings, as well as the meetings of this
body, are subject to House Bill 100, and are open to the public. ObViously,
any members of the Senate are welcome to attend, as well as anybody else.

In addition to the Council, there is a group of unsung heroes, the
standing committees, and the chairmen of those Committees. I would like
to introduce the chairmen who will be serving during the coming year so
that you will be able to direct your concerns and interests to the
appropriate people:

Joseph Jones, Chairman, Library Committee

Harry Barnard, Chairman, Rules and Elections Committee

William Peters, Chairman, Admissions and Academic Standards Committee
Betty Rudnick, Chairman, Student Affairs Committee

Rudolph Schrils, Chairman, Teaching, Learning and Advising Committee
Donald Ivey, Chairman, Academic Planning and Priorities Committee
James Criswell, Chairman, Academic Organization and Structure Committee
Willis Sutton, Chairman, General Studies Committee

Paul Forand, Chairman, Academic Programs Committee

John Walker, Chairman, Research Committee

Margaret Jones, Chairman, Special Teaching Programs Committee




At the moment, Professor Jean Pival is continuing as Chairman of
the Community College Committee, and we have yet to make a firm commitment
on the Chairman for the Academic Facilities Committee.

These 13 standing committee chairmen and a dozen or so Senate Council
members, are your representatives who are charged with conducting much
of the day-to-day business of the Senate. We would be pleased to hear
from any of you at any time and will attempt to provide you with any and
all information that we can. The Council Office is in the basement of
the Administration Building and is staffed with an administrative assistant
some part—time help, and the Senate Council Chairman who is there approximately
half of the time.




There are a number of items to report to you —— actions which have
occurred since the Senate last met —- and since we last had an opportunity
to provide you with a public record of the goings and comings of this
body. Among events over the summer which may be of interest to you, are
material passed by this body late in the spring of 1974, generally called
the Krislov Report, which was submitted to the President. There were
several meetings between myself, Dr. Sears, and the President, concerning
detailed wording and codification. Several draft documents were considered
by the Senate Council and eventually the President reached his decisions,
and codifications have been prepared. Of all the recommendations which
this body submitted to the President, there was one after much soul-searching
which was rejected by him, and that is the request that a faculty member
who is not reappointed be given a statement of the reasons why. All the






 . ,l 3.4... , p . 2,, _ .< -- « , W, “m“ . 1.}. r-7‘.:mu.4..vaas:.2xy.\x\;


Minutes of the University Senate, September 9, 1974 — cont

rest of the recommendations which were submitted by this body to the
President have been accepted in substantially the form they were presented
and have been implemented in the appropriate fashion to be incorporated
1 into the appropriate documents, with one exception —— that is our r\
1 recommendation changing the nature of credit for prior service —— which
requires that the Governing Regulations be changed by the Board of
Trustees before that Recommendation can be implemented. An appropriate
document to go to the Board of Trustees has been prepared and will be
placed on the table at the next Board meeting, which is September 17, and
then must wait the mandatory period, which would be the subsequent Board
meeting, at which time we hope the Board will see fit to pass that
recommendation. 0n the assumption that they will see fit, appropriate
changes in the Administrative Regulations have been prepared and, in fact,
the faculty Advisory Committee which this body recommended to be a part
of that process, has been named. That one provision will not go into
L effect until after December when the Board of Trustees action makes it

legal. If you would like further details on that particular action,
copies of many of those documents have already been circulated and the
rest of them are available in the Council office for your perusal. _\

The Council performed a number of other activities during the
summer. Under the delegated authority provided by this body, calendars
and revisions in calendars, have been approved for the University and
the Colleges of Law, Medicine, Dentistry, and the appropriate circulations
will be made. There have been a number of meetings with President Singletary
concerning the proposed reorganization of the College of Arts and Sciences.
As required by the Governing Regulations and Administrative Regulations
we consulted with the President concerning the appointment of a Search
Committee for a Dean for the College of Dentistry. The Council also
considered, advised, and consulted with the President, as required, con-
cerning some rather technical changes in the Governing and Administrative
Regulations relating to Adjunct Series Titles for professors. Among one
of the more burdensome jobs, we have completed the assignment of all
Senators to standing Committees as required by the regulations insofar
, as possible in accord with the wishes which those people expressed as
I ‘ they came in. We could not satisfy all of you. Sometimes a Senator
got his second or third choice instead of his first choice but we tried 3\
to do the best we could. In addition, the Council, as required by the 3
regulations, has submitted to the President appropriate slates of names
for inclusion on the Privilege and Tenure Advisory Committee, its Hearing
Panel, the Faculty Code Advisory Committee, and the Area Committees.

. Am», ._.._.A.____.__._,—.———¢—-w_——._._.. ....

As has been the policy in the past, the University Committee assign—
ments will be circulated in toto. These should be coming out within the
next few days. You will receive the composition of Senate committees,
standing committees, gt_cetera.

We have continued to work in an area which is one with no particular
glory but which is highly critical and that is in the refinement of def—
initions. This University, our Council on Public Higher Education, and
various national bodies, are engaged in refining the way in which we
handle data, record information, etc. These generally come under the
heading of the NCHEM System —— a lot of highly technical material, much h\
of which in the academic area is being concentrated in Professor Sear's
Office in Institutional Planning.



saw-nnwm-‘nuuv r”!.‘?‘-‘F?"""'"’Y"”"." "w ""M "

Minutes of the University Senate, September 9, 1974 — cont 3872

As a part of the responsibilities of the Senate, the Academic
Program Committee prepared and has continued to develop and use some
rather detailed definitions of various kinds of programs: degree, non—degree,
undergraduate degree programs. These will probably eventually be coming
to this body for insertion in the Rules. In the meantime that is continuing.

As you are undoubtedly aware if you have seen the KERNEL lately,
we have continued to be concerned, as we were last spring, over the con-
fidentiality of student records, and we have continued to work with the
Office of the Vice President for Student Affairs and with other personnel
in that division of the institution in an attempt to insure that the utilza—
tion of student grades and records is handled in an appropriate fashion
which protects the confidentiality of student records. As a part of that we
have asked the Student Affairs Committee to work with Vice President Zum-
winkle in an attempt to explore the interface between the Office of Student
Affairs and various academic segments of the institution in order to
optimize all of our activities in that area; and that will be an area which
presumably you will see in forthcoming reports.

In addition, the Council has been working with one of its ad hoc
advisory committees composed of all the Associate Deans in the Colleges
of the University. That body has concerned itself with several matters,
one of which is the approach by the Deans' offices and elsewhere to the
question of the confidentiality of records; a second, and very important
one, deals with the preparation of an advising document. As you may not
know, we have a large number of students out in our Community College
System many of whom have just spent a year or two in that System, then
transferred to a four—year institution sometimes this one and sometimes
another. Several of our neighboring institutions have found it desirable
to prepare a document which is available to faculty and students in the
Community Colleges explaining in detail how courses taken at those institu—
tions may be used when transferred to one of our sister institutions. This
University and its University System components for which we are responsible,
have not, in the past, prepared such a document; however, our ad hoc
Committee of Associate Deans under the able leadership of Dr. John Robertson,
is presently doing that and we anticipate that we will be provided a
document which the Community College Senate Council, and faculty, and
staff tell us is highly needed that will enable any student and any faculty
member in a Community College of the University of Kentucky to determine
exactly which courses which do not bear common numbers, will or will not
transfer and be acceptable to any baccalaureate degree program in the
University of Kentucky. In addition, it will contain information on
options for meeting college requirements, University General Studies, and
other related matters. Among other things, it will include specific names,
phone numbers, and addresses of individuals to contact. And it is our
hope that by providing this document and by making it widely available,
we will facilitate the transfer of outstanding students, that we will im—
prove communications in relation to our Community College System, and
generally better serve the Commonwealth. We anticipate that the first
draft of this material will be available in early October and that the
final documents will be available and distributed before the end of the

We have had some fun over the summer. As you undoubtedly recall, the
last meeting of the Legislature passed a law which was signed —- House
Bill 100 -- which has become known as the "Sunshine Law" . That document,
reduced to its essentials, specified that with a couple of exceptions,










' ‘ ‘ ‘V‘ ""-'v ~ 'i14-‘~‘m~:v t:'v'-‘_- "f'v-imAmflJnsfiJKmKNEK". wum‘slt‘WW-wmwm,

Minutes of the University Senate, September 9, 1974 — cont

all public agencies are required to hold their meetings in public,
not only to have their meetings open but to provide appropriate notice
of agendas and so on for the press and anybody else who wishes to attend.
We have sought opinions from our Counsel and we have seen advisory r\
opinions from the Attorney General's Office and it is very clear that
the Senate and the Senate Council are subject bodies of Bill 100 and
as such are subject to the Sunshine Law, with the single exception of
when we are discussing certain limited financial matters or when we are
discussing personnel matters involving specific individual names. So
if you are wondering why the Senate Council is suddenly being reported
somewhat more frequently in the KERNEL and other documents, it is
because we have the press present at these meetings and all of our
documents are public. Other agencies at this institution have clearly been
determined to be subject bodies. We are still exploring and attempting to
determine whether such things as a department faculty or a college faculty
or something else are or are not public agencies which are covered within the
definition of the law. As we determine whether they are or are not, we will
let you know.

We have had several meetings —— one a dinner with the Community .\
College Senate Council back in July to explore a number of problems ; 1
there, one of which will come to the floor later in this meeting. We

‘have met with Dr. Downing, who is the new academic advisor in the

Athletics Department and have reviewed some of the material he is
proposing to institute and have generally expressed a concern about
the interface between our athletic programs at the University.

In a more technical area, we have received and considered, along
with the Undergraduate and Graduate Councils, the Blythe Report which
relates to what is called "Standard Nine". This is a regional—wide
proposal that would eliminate the distinction between residence credit
and extension credit as we now use it. A joint study group of the
Undergraduate Council, the Graduate Council, and the Senate Council has
considered this in detail and specific proposals will be before the
Undergraduate and Graduate Councils as soon as they start meeting, and
they will be coming to this body in October and November. Obviously,
many aspects of our programs will change if we no longer make any
distinction between extension and residence credit. We are attempting .\
to determine what will change, how it will change, why, and what particular
and appropriate actions need to be taken.

There are a multitude of other activities. For instance, the Council,
under delegated authority, approved the August 7, 1974 graduation list
which has been circulated; and sent to our Committees a number of activities.
We were able to obtain a statement of administrative feasibility and
have sent to the Academic Program Committee proposed Ph.D. programs in
Philosophy and Communications; and we have several others in the pipe which
are coming along. I have previously noted the charges to the Student
Affairs Committee. We have charged the Admissions and Academic Standards
Committee, and some others, with a review of the way we handle "audit"
grades. We discovered, interestingly enough, that if a student signed up
for audit credit, that's that; he got audit credit without ever having to
go to class. This is an easy way to get through the University —— get I\
a transcript full of audited courses. This is being straightened out.
We are anticipating receiving a report from the a§_hgg committee to study
the question of separating the granting of tenure and promotion, chaired
by Professor Dallas High and already being called the High Report even
though we have yet to receive it. We have received some changes in


.. m , , _... ...-...s.-«~mnx-mmemwwm2“““3‘ ~"’

Minutes of the University Senate, September 9, 1974 — cont 3874

admission requirements to the Graduate School and they have been sent

to committees. We have received a number of details defining electives

and various other kinds of programs -— proposed changes in the Rules of

the Law School. We have received one major item —— a request from the
President to consider some proposals which he, in turn, received from the
College of Arts and Sciences. They are generally known as the Arts and
Sciences proposals but I should point out that, technically, they are not

the Arts and Sciences proposals. The Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences,
in response to a request from the President sometime ago, prepared a list

of recommendations and possible considerations which he sent to the President.
The President received them. They fall into two categories —- some dealing
with the internal organization for the College and some dealing with
possible organizations which would involve splitting off units and re-
combing units of Arts and Sciences and others in the institution. We
received a request from the President that we evaluate these and advise

him. The Senate standing Committee on Academic Organization and Structure,
chaired by Professor Criswell, has received the request to do this ——

both on the internal and external aspects. A number of other Senate standing
Committees have received requests also to review these documents and

attempt to determine if there is anything in their particular area of

concern that should be called to the attention of the Academic Organization
and Structure Committee. In addition, Vice President Cochran is meeting
with a number of deans who are involved.

So we anticipate a full year of consideration of matters that are, if
nothing else, not trivia, and which may change the structure of a significant
portion of this institution, may change the basic way in which we do things,
and some of the basic philosophies under which we operate. The Senate
will be charged, with the assistance of its committees, with dealing with
these questions.

We have scheduled some additional items for future meetings. One
which may be of interest is that we have potentially scheduled an address
by Fran Curci to the October meeting of this body on the academic aspects
of athletic programs.

We have two additional announcements to call to your attention —— one,
there will be a meeting of the AAUP Chapter, attended by President
Singletary, the 18th of September and two, there are two elections to
be conducted this fall, both of which you will be receiving ballots for
within the next week or so. In one of these the faculty here and in the
Community College System will be voting to elect a voting faculty member
to the Board of Trustees; the other, members of the Senate will be voting
to elect three members to the Senate Council to replace myself, Professor
Wilson, and Professor Ogletree who are completing their terms on that body.

This is a summary of what has gone on this summer. It has not been
dull. Somehow we seem to have enough paper in our office to keep it going.
There are a number of significant activities coming forward to you -—
certainly the A & S proposals, Standard Nine, and so on which may drastically
change the nature of this institution depending upon what we do or do not
do. It is this body which will decide. So you have an opportunity to
address to this body and to our structure some fairly substantial issues
dealing with the fundamental question of what is a university, what is
higher education, and, more specifically, what is the University of Kentucky



 3875 Minutes of the University Senate, September 9, 1974 — cont

and what is it we do here and how do we do it. And I think it is

entirely appropriate to say that this is the business of the faculty,
and the business of this body, as the representatives of the faculty,
ultimately to take that action. So it should be an interesting year.



In addition to that, however, there are a number of somewhat more
mundane if no less important matters and we have two of them to place
on the floor at this time. They have been circulated. One deals with
the question of reapportionment —— how Senators are elected to this
body -— and the other one deals with one of our standing committees.

Dr. Smith recognized the Secretary of the Senate Council, Professor Roger
Eichhorn, who presented a motion, on behalf of the Senate Council, that the
Rules gf_the University Senate be amended to delete Section I, 4.16, which

4.16 Community Colleges -— The Committee on Community Colleges
provides appropriate liaison between the University System
and the Community College System. It may make recommendations
to the University Senate on any matter relative to the
Community College System which is in the purview of the
University Senate.

and to add under Section I, 3.11 Purposes and Functions g£_the Senate Council,
an additional paragraph, numbered 11. to read:




11. Act as the official channel of communication between
the University Senate and the Community College Senate
on all matters of mutual concern.

This proposal had been circulated to the faculty under date of August 30, 1974.

Chairman Smith reported that this recommendation had come from the Community
College Committee; that it was strongly endorsed and supported by the Community
College Senate Council; and approved by the University Senate Council.

Without debate, the Senate approved the proposal to eliminate the Senate

standing Committee on Community Colleges from the Rules g£_the University
Senate and to add an additional paragraph 11. to the duties of the Senate
Council under Section I, 3.11 of the Rules.


Dr. Smith again recognized Professor Eichhorn, who presented a motion,
on behalf of the Senate Council that Section 1, paragraph 2.21, Rules gf_thg
University Senate, relating to the apportionment of Senators to various
representative units, be changed to read as follows:

2.21 Elected Faculty Membership - The elected membership shall be
chosen from the full—time teaching and research faculty with
rank of Assistant Professor or higher. The total elected
faculty membership shall equal 160. (Ideally, the fraction
of the total faculty Senate seats which would be apportioned
to an academic unit would be obtained by using the following





 Minutes of the University Senate, September 9, 1974 — cont 3876

1/2 [Fu/Fe + Su/Se]

where Fu and Su are respectively the number of eligible faculty
and the number of full—time students in the unit, and Fe and Se
are the total eligible faculty and students, respectively, in all
units. Usually the portion of the total faculty seats which would
be ideally assigned to a unit will not be a whole number. For
each unit a certain inequity will result, this being the non-
negative deviation of a unit's actual percentage from its ideal
percentage of the seats. The seats shall be apportioned to the
units in a manner which minimizes the total inequity, subject to
the condition that each unit gets at least one seat. If two units
have identical ideal percentages and the minimum would be attained
by giving them different representations, then the extra seat
shall be allocated to one of them by a random process.) An
administrative title below that of Dean shall not automatically
make the holder ineligible.

Dr. Smith explained to the Senators that during the Spring Semester, 1973, the
University Senate accepted a number of major recommendations from the Jewell
Committee which resulted in a reorganization of the Senate; that one of these
Rules' changes dealt with the apportionment procedure whereby representative
Senators were elected from various units in the University; that the Jewell
recommendations were subsequently codified by the Rules Committee, and reviewed
by the Senate Council; and that following the 1974 Spring annual election of
new members to the Senate, it was discovered that there was a questionable
inconsistency or interpretation of the Rule dealing with the apportionment
procedure. It was decided that the election which had already been conducted
would stand but that the Senate Council and the Rules Committee would submit an
alternative apportionment procedure to the Senate so that the full Senate

could decide which of the two interpretations it wished to use. He stated that
the discussions in the Jewell Committee and their report to the Senate had been
based on the premise that the number of Senate seats assigned to a particular
unit should be obtained in two ways: half of the seats would be obtained based
on the ratio of the number 3f_faculty members in the unit to the total number
of eligible faculty in the University and the other half of the seats in the
unit would be obtained from the ratio of the number of full—time equivalent
students in a unit to the number of full—time equivalent students in the Univer—
sity, but that the Rules Committee codification interpretation had added the
total number of full-time students and eligible faculty in each College to the
total eligible faculty and full—time students in all Colleges to determine the

The Senate voted to accept the Jewell Committee's intent for apportionment,
namely, that half of the seats would be obtained based on the ratio of the
number of faculty members in the unit to the total number of eligible faculty in
the University and the other half of the seats in the unit would be obtained
from the ratio of the number of full—time equivalent students in a unit to the
number of full—time equivalent students in the University, and that Section I,
paragraph 2.21 of the Rules be changed to read as presented in the motion.

There being no further business to come before the Senate, it adjourned
at 3:45 p.111.

The candidates for August 7, 1974 degrees which had been circulated to the
faculty and which were alluded to by Chairman Smith as having been approved by the
Senate Council, by tacit delegation of this authority by the Senate, will be mad