SenEx-University Senate Executive Meeting 03/29/15
II. Approval of minutes from March 8, 2016
III. Standing Reports
A. University Senate President Mike Williams
B. Faculty Senate President Tom Beisecker
C. Student Senate President Chancellor Adams
D. Staff President Chris Wallace
IV. Proposed Amendment to USRR 1.3.1, Final Exam Schedules
V. Proposed Amendment to USRR 2.2.8, Grade Replacement.
VI. Proposed Amendment USRR 2.2.10, Pharmacy School Grading for Clinical Rotations.
VII. New Business
UNIVERSITY SENATE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE - SenEx
March 29, 2016 – 3:00 p.m.
College Conference Room, 210 Strong
Approved April 12, 2016
PRESENT: Mike Williams, Tom Beisecker, Joe Harrington, Pam Keller, Chancellor Adams, Harrison Baker, Brent Lee, Chance Maginness, Amalia Monroe-Gulick, Chris Wallace, Peggy Robinson
ABSENT: Ron Barrett-Gonzalez (excused), Liz Phillips (excused)
ALSO PRESENT: Maureen Altman and Kathy Reed, University Governance
Mike William called the meeting to order and asked for announcements.
MINUTES for March 8, 2016 were approved.
University Senate President/SenEx Chair
Mike Williams told SenEx that they should have received an email from him yesterday with the Chancellor’s response to University Senate’s request that the five-year review of Jim Pottorff, University General Counsel, be delayed until the review survey can be made available for the university community. She referred to the policy which explained that the practice is that the committee has the authority to choose who they want to speak and usually limit comments to people who have contact with the person being reviewed. However any comments regarding Jim Pottorff’s review may be sent to the committee, no later than April 15. (email at the end of the minutes).
Faculty Senate President/FacEx Chair
Tom Beisecker noted that Pam Keller had already reported to University Senate about the last KBOR meeting she had attended in his stead. He reported that discussions continue on the Faculty Code and that he had met with Mary Lee Hummert, Vice Provost of Faculty Development, this afternoon. He will continue to report to FacEx and Faculty Senate about the code.
Student Senate President
Due to a delay in Chancellor Adams arrival, Harrison Baker began the report. He announced that Chancellor Adams had been elected to replace Zach George as Student Body Vice President and Student Senate President. The fee package was passed (Chancellor Adams later confirmed that it was signed by Student Body President Jessie Pringle). Approximately $98,000 per year was allotted for the Multicultural Student Government which, after a process, will give them control over the MEF (the Multicultural Education Fund) and EOF (the Educational Opportunity Fund), as well as standing on the fee review process. Chance Maginness stated that he initiated the amendment added to finance that the Multicultural Student Government (MSG) must be approved by University Governance before it can be a student government and is currently being treated as a student group who has been awarded a fee. Baker said that when approval is received MSG will be similar to the Student Senate. Baker also reported that changes to the Student Code of Rights and Responsibilities is being discussed, particularly off campus jurisdiction. The state’s legislation on transgender bathroom facilities is being debated.
Staff Senate President
Chris Wallace reported elections for Staff Senate will close on Thursday at 4:30. He was pleased to report that the response has been good with around 800 responses.
Proposed Amendment to USRR 1.3.1, Final Exam Schedules
Williams read the rationale for the proposed amendment, noting that it basically codifies an existing procedure, and asked for a motion.
Motion to approve amendments to USRR 1.3.1. Wallace/Baker. Passed.
Proposed Amendment to USRR 2.2.8, Grade Replacement.
Williams explained that a student is allowed five attempts to retake a lower level course (below 300-level) to replace a D or an F. He explained that the Academic Policies and Procedures (AP&P) committee debated the language of what grade replacement is or does. He noted that when a student retakes a class one of the grade replacement attempts is used. If a higher grade is earned the student achieves grade replacement, meaning the higher grade goes into the GPA calculation and the original grade remains on the transcript but is not included in the GPA calculation. The problem to consider was how earning a lower grade in an attempted grade replacement course affects a student’s GPA. Williams read through the amendment noting that, until a higher grade is earned, if a lower grade is earned, all grades will be on transcript and calculated in the GPA. When a higher grade is earned all lower grades will not be calculated in the GPA but will remain on the transcript. He asked for a motion to accept the amendment.
Motion to consider the amendments to USRR 2.2.8. Beisecker/Baker
Maginness and Beisecker asked for the rationale for 184.108.40.206.2. Williams explained it is partially based on the committee’s discussion of how many times a student should retake a course and possibly take a seat from a student who is taking the course for the first time. Also, if a grade hasn’t improved there is no grade replacement and therefore the new lower grade is considered in the GPA. He added that a when a final higher grade is earned the lower grades will not be included in the GPA calculation [220.127.116.11.3]. Beisecker was concerned 18.104.22.168.2 would be depressing to a student. Maginness thought 22.214.171.124.2 was absurd and penalizes a student for attempting to improve; Baker agreed. Baker observed that while a student may get grade replacement in a third, fourth, or fifth attempt many students would be discouraged after a lower grade on the second attempt, resulting in their GPA becoming even lower; Maginness agree that most students wouldn’t make a third attempt. Amalia Monroe-Gulick suggested that lower grades could be avoided by withdrawing before a grade is given but Baker pointed sometimes it is too late to withdraw and added that one of the grade replacement attempts would be used.
Maginness moved that USRR 126.96.36.199.2 be amended to read “the lower grade will show on the transcript but will not be included in the GPA calculation”; Baker seconded.
In the discussion that followed Baker noted that with the amendment students are being punished enough since that lower grades still appear on the transcript. Joe Harrington pointed out that the five attempt limit already prevents students from taking classes over and over again. After discussion a motion was made to call to question.
Motion to call to question (to end discussion and vote on the amendment). Maginness/Baker. Passed
Maginness/Baker’ motion was put to a vote.
Motion to amend proposed amendment USRR 188.8.131.52.2 to read “the lower grade will show on the transcript but will not be included in the GPA calculation”. Maginness/Baker. Yeas, 6; Nays, 3; Abstentions, 1. Passed.
Proposed Amendment USRR 2.2.10, Pharmacy School Grading for Clinical Rotations.
Williams read the rationale for the proposed amendment and asked for a motion.
Motion to approve amendments to USRR 2.2.10. Beisecker/Baker. Passed.
Baker asked if he could be involved in the University Senate’s discussion adding gender neutral language to University Governance policies via SKYPE since he will be in Scotland next year. Williams assured him that the senate would make sure that someone knowledgeable about the issue presents.
Amalia Monroe-Gulick informed SenEx that she will not be attending the University/Faculty Senate meetings next week. She informed SenEx that FRPR’s (Faculty Rights, Privileges and Responsibilities committee) KU Core Curriculum survey will be sent out tomorrow.
There was no further business. The meeting was adjourned at 3:50 p.m.