Oakland University Senate
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY OAKLAND
Rochester, Michigan
SENATE MEETING MINUTES 19 FEBRUARY 1960
PRESENT: Mr. Amann, Mr. Burke, Mr. Danielson, Mr. Eklund, Mr. Fitzsimmons, Mr. Gherity, Mr. Hammerle, Mr. Hoopes, Mr. Kluback, Mrs. Kovach, Mr. Matthews, Mr. McKay, Mr. Pearson, Mrs. Popluiko, Mr. Pope, Mr. Rhode, Mr. Schwab, Mr. Stoutenburg, Mr. Straka, Mr. Swanson, Mr. Tafoya, Mr. Taulbee, Mr. Tomboulian, Mr. Varner, Mrs. White, Mr. Wilder
Mr. Vamer called the meeting to order. The secretary read the minutes of the previous meeting. Mr. Hoopes moved that the portion beginning "Discussion" followed by three lines defining the three course plan be removed from the minutes since it looked awkward and did not present both sides of the question. The motion was seconded by Mr. Amann. After the discussion, Mr. Hoopes withdrew the motion and requested that he be allowed to prepare a statement to be included in the minutes explaining the advantages of the four course program Mr. Vamer suggested that because some checking of the original notes was necessary, the approval of the minutes would be deferred until the next meeting. All present agreed to this suggestion.
Mr. Vamer then referred to the Informational Report from the Educational Policy Committee dated February 19, 1960.
Mr. Wilder asked what were the responsibilities of the committee listed in paragraph 2. Mr. Varner stated that these committees are the ones suggested by the Educational Policy Committee but the responsibilities have not been described. Mr. Pope suggested a committee on news ideas be established. Mr. Vamer pointed out that Mr. Pope's suggestion could be handled by the committee to investigate honors programs and other special programs. Mr. Matthews stated that Mr. Wilder was the third member of the Foreign Studies Exploratory Committee described in paragraph 4.
Paragraph 6 was discussed, and Mr. Vamer emphasized the need for all proposals to be put in writing to Mr. Hoopes.
Mr. Hammerle, secretary of the Educational Policy Committee, moved that the Registrar record grades without plus or minus signs; any teacher retains the option of posting on his door (or otherwise distributing) unofficial grades that include plus or minus signs. It was seconded by Mr. Tomboulian. Mr. Pearson suggested that the + and - be recorded on the permanent record card. Mr. Stoutenburg said it would be possible but he did not approve of the idea. Mr. Amann suggested that we discuss this more thoroughly, not only in terms of + and - but in terms of our whole grading system. Motion approved.
Mr. Hammerle moved that the following academic standards be adopted by the Senate:
(a) A student is placed on probation if his cumulative grade-point average is below 1.8.
(b) A student is dismissed from school if his cumulative grade-point average is below 1.0.
c) If a student is placed on probation, he must raise his & cumulative grade-point average to 1.8 or above during either of the next two terms he is in residence; otherwise, he is dismissed from school.
(d) A student is admitted to junior standing only if his cumulative grade-point average is 2.0 or above.
Mr. Tomboulian seconded the motion.
Mr. Amann asked the basis on which students would be readmitted after they had been dropped. Mr. Stoutenburg explained that generally when a student is asked to withdraw because of academic failure, he is told that he can reapply for reinstatement after one year. Sometimes a student will attend another accredited school for a year, and if he earns a C or better average then he can be reinstated. Mr. Schwab moved that the academic standard proposal be returned to the Educational Policy Committee in order to include the procedure for reinstating students dismissed because of academic reasons. It was seconded by Mr. Gherity. Mr. Tomboulian pointed out that the University needs the academic status policy established immediately so everyone knows what is expected of the student and when the student is to be placed on probation. Motion disapproved.
Mr. Stoutenburg moved that we allow any new student, excluding transfer students two terms to make a 1.0 average, but if he does not make the 1.0 average at the end of the second term he be dismissed. If he does make the 1.0 average then the rules as set forth by the Educational Policy Committee would apply. Mrs. Kovach seconded the motion. Mr. Vamer suggested that provisions (a) and (b) go into effect after the second quarter for freshman students. Mr. Amann pointed out that some students would stay even though they had all F's. Mr. Hoopes commented that he felt Mr. Stoutenburg's amendment should be amended to go into effect after the first quarter.
Mr. Hammerle stated he agreed with allowing a student two terms to make a 1.0 but felt that the student should have a minimum 1.8 by the end of the third term or be dismissed. Mr. Stoutenburg withdrew his amendment in favor of Mr. Hammerle's recommendation. Mr. Hammerle amended part (b) of his original motion to read "A student is dismissed from school if his cumulative grade-point average is below 1.0, except that no first term freshman student shall be so dismissed." The motion was seconded by Mr. Hoopes. Motion approved. Mr. Matthews asked what is meant by junior standing as stated in paragraph (d) of the academic standards? After a brief discussion, Mr. Fitzsimmons moved that this be referred to the Educational Policy Committee for clarification. Mr. Hoopes seconded the motion. Motion approved.
Mr. Hammerle proposed a second amendment to the academic standards to change the figure 1.8 in paragraphs (a) and (c) to 1.5. This was seconded by Mr. Hoopes. Mr. Tomboulian explained that of his and Mr. Hammerle's advisees, those students below 1.8 constituted 72% of the group, those below 1.5 constituted 61% and those below 1.0 constituted 39% of the group, Mr. Stoutenburg stated that 55% of the students made 2.0 or better. Amendment disapproved.
Mr. Matthews suggested that we make a distinction between this particular group, 1959-60, and the permanent grading system to start in 1960. Seconded by Mr. Kluback. Motion disapproved.
Mr. Pope suggested that students who are not working up to their capacity be dismissed. Mr. Amann suggested that only the second and third quarter of the freshman year be used to determine whether a student should be placed on probation.
Mr. Hammerle then proposed an amendment to the academic standards to change the figure 1.8 in paragraphs (a) and (c) to 1.6, Seconded by Mr. Wilder. Amendment approved.
Mr. Hammerle moved that a part (e) be added to the academic standards to read a follows: "All academic dismissals are subject to review by the Dean of the Faculty or his appointed representative." Seconded by Mr. Gherity. Mr. Pope suggested that the Educational Policy Committee study the possibility of instituting some method of determining whether or not a student is performing near capacity by the time they reach junior standing in order to stay in school. Mr. Vamer stated that he did not feel this topic was related to the motion before the group. Motion approved.
Mr. Swanson moved that the Educational Policy Committee review the question of grades and their meaning. Seconded by Mr. Matthews, Motion approved.
Mr. Hammerle moved that all courses carrying credit are to be assigned four credits per term retroactive to the beginning of this school year. Seconded by Mr. Tomboulian. Motion approved.
Mr. Hammerle moved that the end of Paragraph II (a) of the "Organization of the University" dated January 21, 1960, be changed to read, "...the Director of Admissions, the University Librarian, the Associate Librarian; and..." Seconded by Mr. Tomboulian. Motion approved.
The Senate asked that the Educational Policy Committee study the matter of readmission. Mr. Vamer said this would be done.
Mr. Taulbee raised the question as to how frequently a student may take a course or if they could repeat a course at all. After a short discussion, Mr. Taulbee moved to refer this question to the Educational Policy Committee. Seconded by Mr. Tafoya. Motion approved.
Meeting adjourned.