Oakland University Senate
January 16, 1968
Agenda
To: Members of the University Senate
From: Donald D. O'Dowd, for the Steering Committee
Re: Agenda for Meeting of January 16, 1968
The next meeting of the Senate will be held on Tuesday, January 16, at 3:30 p.m. in rooms 128-30, Oakland Center.
A. New Business
1. Recommendation from the Committee on Academic Standing and Baccalaureate Honors (Mr. McKay).
a. That the Faculty of Oakland University nominate the undergraduate students named in the list to be distributed at the meeting for the bachelor's degree as of January 16, 1968. These students have been recommended for the bachelor's degree by their respective school and college faculties. (The Steering Committee requests that the Senate authorize a final vote on this and the following two motions at this meeting.)
b. That the Faculty of Oakland University nominate the graduate students named in the list to be distributed at the meeting for the master's degree as of January 16, 1968. These students have been recommended for the master's degree by their respective school and college faculties.
c. That University Honors be awarded to the graduating students named in the list to be distributed at the meeting.
2. Recommendation from the Steering Committee acting on behalf of the Placement Council. (Mr. O'Dowd)
The Placement Council has formulated two requests for Senate action as a result of its study of placement policy during the past two months:
First, the Placement Council recommends that the University Senate express its grave concern about the actions of General Hershey encouraging local Selective Service Boards to take punitive action toward students who express disagreement and dissent with military recruiting practices. The Senate may do this by adopting the following resolution and sending copies of it to General Hershey, President Johnson, and the U.S. Senators and Representatives from the State of Michigan.
a. The members of the Senate of Oakland University are deeply concerned by the letter sent by General Lewis B. Hershey to local Selective Service Boards on October 26, 1967, in which it was implied that university students may be reclassified for expressing disagreement with military recruiting practices. Subsequent public statements by General Hershey have amplified this interpretation of the original letter and deepened its implications. We believe that this letter, by its very imprecise wording, endangers the established priviledge of students to express vigorous dissent on the college campus. In effect, it is an attack on the freedom of expression that is central to the concept of the modern university. We urgently request that the letter be withdrawn and students be relieved of a repressive threat of reprisal for legal expressions of disagreement.
Second, the Placement Council submits to the Senate a report on policy concerning the use of university facilities by prospective employers of Oakland students. The Council requests that the Senate accept this report
b. The report is contained in Attachment A to this agenda.
Note: The Steering Committee believes that acceptance of this report will indicate approval of the actions of the council in reviewing policy relating to the use of facilities by military recruiters. Acceptance of the report also implies support of the policy decisions of the council, but the Senate reserves the right to discuss this issue at length and recommend a change of policy at a later date.
3. Recommendation from the Academic Policy Committee (Mr. Burke)
In October, 1967, Mr. John Dovaras, Director of the Oakland Singers, requested permission to take that group, which has 36-40 members, on an annual week-long tour. He suggested March 17-23, 1968 as dates for the first such trip, and outlined a tentative schedule of singing engagements and an estimate of expenses. Provost O'Dowd and Dean Matthews decided that since approval of such a trip would mean excused absence from a week of classes, potentially affecting all Schools and Colleges in the University, the issue raised a question of general policy and should be sent to the Academic Policy Committee of the University Senate. This Committee has deliberated, and wishes to recommend that the following policy be adopted by the Senate:
a. ALL TRIPS BY OFFICIALLY SPONSORED ACTIVITIES WHICH REQUIRE STUDENTS TO MISS CLASSES MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. NO ONE ACTIVITY MAY SCHEDULE TRIPS INVOLVING MORE THAN A TOTAL OF FIVE CLASS DAYS IN ANY ONE SEMESTER.
(Comment: This could be one week-long trip, as the Oakland Singers propose, or several shorter ones.)
2. FOR ANY TRIP INVOLVING THREE OR MORE CLASS DAYS, EACH STUDENT MUST SUBMIT TO THE DIRECTOR OF THE ACTIVITY A NOTE FROM THE INSTRUCTOR OF EACH COURSE AFFECTED, TO THE EFFECT THAT THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE COURSE CAN STILL BE MET BY STUDENTS GOING ON THE TRIP.
(Comment: With the limitation to trips of three days or more, this should not unduly burden the instructors or activities. All shorter trips would be left to the student to arrange at his own risk. Note that the instructor is not being asked to evaluate the worth of the activity, but soley whether this particular student can afford to miss the class time. Perhaps a simple form could be prepared for this purpose by the Activities Center.)
3. IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN SOME CONTROL ON THE NUMBER OF SUCH TRIPS, THE DEAN OF STUDENTS SHOULD BE INFORMED OF EACH ONE WELL IN ADVANCE, AND WILL MAKE AN ANNUAL REPORT TO THE ACADEMIC POLICY COMMITTEE.
(General comment: The intention of the legislation is to encourage the development of groups like the Oakland Singers, while protecting both students and faculty against undue interference with course work. There may well be courses--Mr. Hetenyi has already informed us that ED 455, student teaching, is one of them--from which a student simply cannot be excused for a week. Ideally, each student contemplating a trip should receive preliminary clearance from his instructors at the beginning of that semester.)
4. Recommendation from the Ad Hoc Senate Visitor Policy Committee (Mrs. White)
The Senate Visitor Policy Committee urges the adoption of the following motion:
a. Meetings of the Senate are open to all members of the Senate electorate. They are not open to any non-member except by special action of the Senate.
b. Non-senators may not participate in any discussion of the Senate except by special action of the Senate or by recognition from the chair.
c. Any senator may move at any time that the open session by adjourned and that the Senate reconvene in executive (closed) session after the necessary length of time it takes to clear the meeting room of all non-senators. This motion may be carried by a simple majority of senators present and voting.
d. The Chancellor as presiding officer of the Senate may request a motion for executive session at any time as outlined in 9 above.
The following rationale is submitted by the committee in support of the foregoing motion:
a. The committee could not convince itself that it would ever be proper to exclude some members of the electorate from meetings while permitting others to attend. The fine graduation of discriminations necessary to satisfactorily resolve this one point would seem insurmountable or at least so time consuming that it would not be worth the effort. It was, therefore, decided that under normal conditions interested members of the electorate should be permitted to attend meetings of the Senate.
b. The committee is fully aware of the present burgeoning size of the electorate and assumes that certain limitations are implicit in room size, or the number of seats, or some such physical constraints peculiar to the space chosen for a given meeting. In cases where these limitations become apparent, the first visitors present should be entitled to remain. Later arriving visitors, who obviously cannot be accommodated by reason of physical limitations of the meeting room, can be rightfully excluded.
c. The committee considered the fact that, conceivably, members of the electorate could also be members of staffs of various publications normally accepted as part of the University community. Even in view of this, the committee did not feel that it could limit attendance of certain members of the electorate while permitting others to attend. However, there are valid arguments for excluding members of the public press from the discussions of any deliberative body. The exclusion of non-members of the Senate electorate would seem to be sufficient safeguard here.
d. The committee strongly urges the adoption of the motion. It feels it is in keeping with the spirit that prompted the Constitution Commission to include student representation on the Senate. The constitution that creates the Senate goes by the title of "The Constitution of Oakland University." The very title implies a broad constituency of people concerned about the welfare of the institution. The Senate so created, likewise is known as the "University Senate." This title again emphasizes the breadth of the constituency. Your committee urges adoption of this motion at this time so as not to impugn in any way the intent of the trainers of the constitution when they chose these titles.
5. Recommendation from the Steering Committee (Mr. O'Dowd)
The Steering Committee wishes to recommend that the following undergraduate students be appointed to the specified standing committees of the Senate, The students were nominated by the ad hoc Student Nominating Committee.
a. For the Athletics Committee: Oscar Carlson and Edwin Johnson.
b. For the Student Publications Committee: Roger D. Brooks, and Robert L. Quick.
6. Report of Steering Committee activities (Mr. O'Dowd)
a. The members of the ad hoc Student Nominating Committee which contributed item 5 above are Miss Attwood, Mr. Colton, Mr. Richter, Mr. Simmer, Mr. Tennyson, and Miss Juth, chairman.
b. The members of the ad hoc Senate Visitor Policy Committee which contributed item 4 above are Mr. Atkinson, Mr. Attwood, and Mrs. White, chairman.
c. Messrs. Appleton, Brieger, Burdick, and Hammerle have joined the Student Life Commission filling vacancies among the Senate appointees to the Commission.
d. The Steering Committee proposed that beginning in the fall semester 1968, the Senate should meet on the first Thursday of each month during the regular academic year with the exception of September and January when it should meet on the second Thursday of the month. Additional meetings will be scheduled to coincide with the dates established for awarding degrees and to transact additional business as determined by the Steering Committee.
e. The Steering Committee has received a lengthy report from the ad hoc Committee on the University Calendar containing a detailed and thoughtful analysis of calendar problems for the spring semester 1968. The committee recommends that the established spring semester calendar be continued in its present form for at least the coming year. It is suggested that a few eight-week. May and June, courses might be developed this year as a pilot program. The Steering Committee has accepted the report and advised the administration of its support of the recommendations. A general report of this acti6n was sent to all members of the University in a memo dated January 8, 1968.
DDO'D:ljk
attachments (2)