Oakland University Senate

February 26, 1964

Agenda

MEMORANDUM
February 24, 1964

TO: All Members of the Senate

FROM: Donald D. O'Dowd, for the Steering Committee

RE: Agenda for Meeting of February 26, 1964

The next meeting of the Senate will be on Wednesday, February 26, 1964, at 4:00 p.m. in room 126-7 of the Oakland Center.

A. New Business

1. Recommendations from the Committee on Instruction (Mr. Tomboulian)

a. The following motion will serve to establish the legality of the college catalog and permit the Committee on Instruction to amend the catalog as the need arises without the necessity of seeking additional Senate approval.

The Senate approves the 1963-65 University Catalog  as a legal document and empowers the Committee on Instruction to make necessary emendations to the catalog in preparing subsequent editions.

b. A new definition of the "I" (Incomplete) grade is presented for Senate approval. The primary change from the present definition is the addition of the last sentence establishing a limitation on the length of time that an "I" may remain on the record of a student who is not in residence.

The "I" (Incomplete) grade is a temporary grade that may be given only after the 13th week in a course where a student is unable to complete the required work because of severe hardship. An "I" grade does not become official until approved by the Dean of the University. It is not to be considered a way whereby a student may avoid receiving a failing grade in a course. It must be removed by completing the required work before the deadline set by the instructor, but in no case later than the end of the next semester that the student is in residence, or a grade of 0.0 will be recorded. If more than three semesters intervene before the student resumes residence, then the "I" grade becomes an "N" grade.

2. Recommendation from the Faculty Affairs Committee (Mr. Haden)

a. The Faculty Affairs Committee recommends the approval of the Rules of Tenure that constitute the first two pages of the attached document that is entitled Appointment and Tenure Policies. The Rules of Tenure require the approval of the Board of Trustees before they take effect.

The policies and procedures described in the remaining five pages of the Appointment and Tenure Policies document are to take effect as soon as possible after the distribution of this Senate agenda. They are administrative procedures and practices that have been approved by the Faculty Affairs Committee and will be implemented by the Dean of the University.

3. Recommendation from the Developmental Programs Committee (Mr. Roose)

a. Viewing Oakland University, with its current curriculum or a new curriculum, as an experimental laboratory in which new ideas in higher education can be tested in practice, the Developmental Programs Committee recommends the adoption of the following motion.

(1) Faculty teams shall be encouraged to formulate undergraduate educational programs consistent with the aims of liberal education and utilizing as much or as little of our current curriculum as desirable. Such programs should be conceived to operate within a student-faculty ratio of 20-1 and to involve no more than 200 students, to be recruited from incoming freshmen and/or students currently enrolled.

(2) When a committed team has worked out curricular and administrative details of a plan, it shall first inform the Senate and, then, with the approval of the Dean of the University, put the plan into operation. Administrative details should include plans, if needed, for adjusting graduation requirements for students under the plan and guaranteeing student readmission to the standard University curriculum without hardship, if the plan should prove unworkable.

4. Recommendation from the Admissions Committee (Mr. Mobley, Acting Chairman)

a. The Admissions Committee recommends that the following motion be adopted by the Senate.

That Oakland University institute by the fall semester, 1965, one of the nationally recognized entrance testing programs as part of the requirements for admission.

Members of the Committee will comment on the use of tests as an admissions criterion. A series of comments are presented below in explanation of the specific motion before the Senate.

(1) The freshman orientation testing administered by the Psychological Services Department has revealed that some of the students who ranked in the upper quarter of their high school graduating class score very low on these tests and have proved to be poor academic risks for Oakland University.  It is felt that by having external test scores before the decision to admit, a better judgment regarding individual students could be made.

(2) It is believed that external test scores would add another dimension to the admission decision.

(3) The external test scores would assist the summer orientation counselors in advising students more effectively for their first semester on campus. Also, the academic advisor would have another piece of information when working with the student during subsequent semesters.

(4) The external test scores would provide the University with data for establishing a procedure for predicting college success on individual students.

(5) The external test scores would provide a form of standard measurement of students from any high school.

(6) The information obtained from external tests and from actual freshman grades would furnish the University with a means of comparing entering groups from year to year.

(7) The external test scores could eventually eliminate the testing which is a part of our orientation program.

(8) The external test scores would provide information that we could use to compare our students with other college students and give us another check on our curriculum.

5. Recommendations from the Committee on Instruction (Mr. Tomboulian)

a. The following materials on Major Standing describe a procedure for monitoring the progress of a student in his major program. The Committee on Instruction recommends Senate approval of the sections below numbered 3 and 4. These two sections contain the only two policy changes included in the procedure.

Major Standing

Attention has been called to the fact that a student's performance is carefully watched during his first four semesters and at the time of admission to Major Standing, but from that time until graduation there are no University-wide procedures in effect which check up on student performance in major, minor, elective, and University courses. It is therefore possible that a student could have an over-all 2.0 average and nevertheless be doing unsatisfactory work in his major courses; he would be eligible to graduate from the University, but the department would be unwilling to certify him in his major. The following procedures are suggested as a means of controlling a student's eligibility to achieve and maintain Major Standing in a department:

(1) "A student may be admitted to Major Standing if he has passed with at least a 2.0 average all courses prerequisite to the major."[Senate minutes, April 25, 1962]

(2) Upon admission to Major Standing, a departmental advisor takes responsibility for supervising the student's performance in his major courses.

(3) When a student drops below 2.0 in major courses, the advisor reports him to the department chairman, and the student is placed on departmental probation. The Academic Standing Committee is also notified. [It would be desirable to have this information furnished  by CDPC3]

(4) If the student is not removed from probation after one further semester's work in major courses, he is liable to be dropped from Major Standing at the discretion of the department chairman.

5) It is the responsibility of the major advisor and the department chairman to enforce these regulations. All grades are reviewed by the advisor and the departmental chairman (when necessary) at the end or beginning of each semester.

(6) The Registrar must send copies of student grades to the departmental advisor and the chairman at the same time they go to the student.