May 13, 2015
To: Brad Seebach, Chair of Faculty Senate
From: Tony Docan-Morgan, Chair of Committee on Academic Policies and Standards
Re: 2014-2015 Final Report
The following final report is a summary of the activities of the 2014-2015 CAPS in accordance with its
standard committee duties and special charges:
CAPS standard committee duties and responsibilities:
According to Faculty Senate Bylaw II. B. The Academic Policies and Standards Committee, the duties and
responsibilities of the committee shall include:
1. Formulating and reviewing local policies and standards concerning admissions, advising, retention,
advanced standing, probation, dismissal, readmission, the grading system, and graduation honors for
undergraduate students.
2. Ensuring equitable application of standards by the undergraduate schools and colleges.
3. Supervising the administration of these standards and formulating procedures for hearing student
appeals and petitions on academic matters not resolved by administrative offices of the university.
Special Charges
1. Special charge from Provost: CAPS was informed that mass final exam time requests from
instructors/departments have increased and that there is currently not a formalized method of reviewing
and granting mass final exam time requests. CAPS was charged with investigating this issue and to work
with Records and Registration to develop a formalized method of reviewing existing mass final exam
needs and granting new mass final exam time requests.
CAPS investigated the current issue at UW-L, surveyed registrars at the other 11 4-year UW institutions
about the use of mass exam times, and made specific recommendations for creating two new mass exam
time slots, instituting a formalized method of granting new mass final exam requests, and instituting a
regular review of existing mass exam time slots. Faculty Senate approved these recommendations. See
Appendix A for the full report (pages 6-9, “Report on Mass Exam Times”).
2. Charge letter: “Consider whether there should be restrictions on the enrollment of incoming
freshmen in online courses. There are several aspects to this consideration, and the preferred outcome
would be for the Committee to recommend policy for approval by the Faculty Senate. There is concern
over whether freshmen should be taking online courses at all, as it may detract from full integration
with campus life and the college experience. If they are allowed to enroll in online courses, should there
be a limit to the number of online courses per semester for freshmen? Should they be allowed or
encouraged to take online summer courses from UWL during the summer before they arrive for their
first semester on campus? Should enrollment in online courses be possible only if the student knowingly
chooses to enroll in an online course, or should the Records Office enroll incoming freshmen in classes
without any distinction as to mode of instruction? Should we consider hybrid courses in a similar
manner?”
In order to gain context and perspective about this charge, CAPS consulted with Jennie Hartzheim (First
Year Experience Coordinator, Office of Student Life), Fred Pierce (Associate Vice Chancellor, Academic
Affairs), Natalie Solverson (Director of Institutional Research), Brian Udermann (Director of Online
Education), and Lynn Weiland (Assistant Director of Continuing Education and Extension, Coordinator for
Summer School and J-term). CAPS also heard from its consultants, including Carla Burkhardt (Senior
Administrative Program Specialist, College of Science and Health), Guy Hurling (Senior Student Service
1
Coordinator, College of Science and Health), Sandy Keller (Senior Administrative Program Specialist,
College of Liberal Studies), Becky Vianden (Assistant to the Dean, College of Business Administration),
and Jan von Ruden (Associate Registrar).
CAPS considered a variety of points for and against freshman enrollment in online courses. CAPS
recognizes that students benefit from and need instructional and institutional scaffolding and support, much
of which occurs in face-to-face environments (e.g., advising, tutoring). However, CAPS believes that data
provided by the Office of Institutional Research regarding freshman online enrollment and performance do
not illustrate any significant problems. These data indicate, for example, that of the 70 online course
enrollments where a grade was earned by incoming new students in summer 2012, summer 2013, and
summer 2014, students earned 97% Cs or higher. More specifically, grades included 38 As, 16 ABs, 11 Bs,
1 BC, 2 Cs, 1 D and 1 F. Further, there were zero freshman receiving Ws in online courses over this period
of time. Additionally, freshman enrollment in online summer courses is reasonably low. Only one student
enrolled in an online course during 2012, 10 students enrolled in 2013, and 48 students enrolled in 2014
(2.4% of incoming freshman). CAPS agreed that it is unnecessary to develop policy limiting freshman
enrollment in online classes as freshman enrollment in online classes is a fairly new phenomenon, few
freshman are enrolling in online classes, and they are performing well. However, the university should
continue to monitor freshman enrollment and performance.
Regarding whether freshman should be allowed or encouraged to take online summer courses from UW-L
during the summer before they arrive for their first semester on campus, CAPS noted the aforementioned
data, which demonstrates student success. Further, CAPS considered students’ motivations to register for
online classes, motivations that do not lend well for good student success, motivations for registering for
more than one course during the summer, and potential solutions. See Appendix B (page 10, “First Year
Students Enrolling in Online Courses”), which was created by Lynn Weiland and distributed at a CAPS
meeting on October 24, 2014.
CAPS believes that freshman should be allowed to take online summer courses from UW-L during the
summer before their first semester on campus. If appropriate, students should be encouraged to take online
summer courses from UW-L during the summer before their first semester on campus (e.g., student has
prior experience with online learning, student wishes to become familiar with D2L, student indicates
motivation for enrolling in summer online coursework).
One question in the charge asks, should enrollment in online courses be possible only if the student
knowingly chooses to enroll in an online course, or should the Records Office enroll incoming freshmen in
classes without any distinction as to mode of instruction? CAPS agreed that enrollment in online courses
should be possible only if the student knowingly chooses to enroll in an online course. CAPS consulted
specifically with the Records and Registration Office and Continuing Education and Extension about this
question. Both units agree that this is not currently an issue. However, both units did indicate that students
should be sent additional start date reminders to their UW-L and non-UW-L email addresses in the days and
weeks leading up to the online class. Further, Records and Registration indicated that they will
communicate and work closely with Continuing Education regarding enrolling students in online courses for
summer sessions.
After examining institutional data and hearing from the above-mentioned consultants, CAPS unanimously
agreed not to recommend policy limiting freshman enrollment in online or hybrid classes. At this time,
CAPS does not perceive or foresee a problem with freshman online enrollment. Looking forward, however,
CAPS:
 supports Online Education’s development of an online learning success module, as well as requiring
all students to complete this module before enrolling in an online class.
2

recommends that the university (e.g., CAPS or another committee) receive a charge in subsequent
academic years to continue to monitor trends in freshman online enrollment and performance.
3. Charge letter: “Discussion in student governance groups during the last year has made it likely that a
request is forthcoming for the faculty to consider a change from the A, AB, B grading scale to the more
common “A, A-, B+, B” grading scale. Work with the student representatives for this committee to
consider the relative merits of our existing system.”
In October 2014, the committee informed student CAPS members who are also on Student Senate that
CAPS is available to discuss this topic. CAPS was never approached by student representatives to discuss
this topic.
4. Charge letter: “Consider requiring students who are on probation (or whose appeals for
reinstatement to the university are approved by the committee) to have a registration restriction
(negative service indicator) placed on them. They would then need to meet with their/advisors before
enrolling in a new term, in order to remove this restriction.”
Regarding this charge, CAPS consulted with Tim Tritch (Interim Director of Career Service and Academic
Advising), Fred Pierce (Associate Vice Chancellor, Academic Affairs), and Jennie Hartzheim (First Year
Experience Coordinator, Office of Student Life). CAPS also heard from its consultants, including Carla
Burkhardt (Senior Administrative Program Specialist, College of Science and Health), Guy Hurling (Senior
Student Service Coordinator, College of Science and Health), Sandy Keller (Senior Administrative Program
Specialist, College of Liberal Studies), Becky Vianden (Assistant to the Dean, College of Business
Administration), and Jan von Ruden (Associate Registrar).
CAPS proposed the following policy to Faculty Senate on February 26, 2015, which was approved:
“Students who are on probation will have an academic probation registration restriction (negative service
indicator) placed on their student record. Students must meet with their academic advisor of their primary
major before registering for a new semester in order to remove this restriction.” See Appendix C for the
policy proposal document (page 11, “Academic Probation Registration Restriction Policy”).
5. Charge letter: “Examine summer session drop rates and whether students are taking overloads.
Current policy does not restrict students from tak[ing] twelve credits in the same third of the summer
session, for example. This may be of particular concern with summer online course offerings.”
In order to gain context and perspective about this charge, CAPS consulted with Fred Pierce (Associate
Vice Chancellor, Academic Affairs), Natalie Solverson (Director of Institutional Research), Brian
Udermann (Director of Online Education), and Lynn Weiland (Assistant Director of Continuing Education
and Extension, Coordinator for Summer School and J-term). CAPS also heard from its regular consultants.
CAPS requested and examined data provided by the Office of Institutional Research regarding summer
session drop rates and whether students are taking overloads. In her report created for CAPS, Natalie
Solverson (Director of Institutional Research) indicated the following regarding summer session overloads:


75 undergraduate students took overloads (more than 12 credits) in the summer session. Of these 75
students, four of them were completing more than one class. The rest were completing internship
courses or fieldwork (CHE 498, RTH 498, REC 450).
I then looked at undergraduate students who were completing 12 credits in the summer session (the
maximum before an overload kicks in). There were 24 students who completed 12 credits when the
internship courses (such as ESS 450) were excluded, and I did not find any examples of students
completing all 12 credits online within the same session. I did find two students who completed as
3


many as nine credits online within the same session but they had achieved GPAs of greater than 3.0
so that seemed to be a successful outcome. Of the 24 students, GPAs earned in summer ranged
from a low of 2.38 to 4.0.
I also looked at students who were enrolled in 10 to 12 credits for the summer term. Of this group,
there were three students who enrolled in summer session courses who earned less than a 2.0 GPA
for the term. When I looked up the records of those students, it seemed that they had struggled in
prior terms (probation, etc.) so that question might actually be tied into the question related to
advising students on probation or who are ineligible and then readmitted.
The synopsis of my analysis on overloads would be this: regardless of modality of instruction,
summer session academic achievement patterns the academic achievement of the individual student
in the other terms of enrollment. The question of summer enrollments might be more of an advising
question (the student who believes that they will be able to get “all caught up this summer” despite
evidence from past semesters indicating otherwise).
CAPS believes that these data do not support the premise that summer overloads represent an issue.
CAPS also examined summer session drop rates. For summer 2014, the drop rate in face-to-faces courses
was 5.73%, and the drop rate in online courses was 6.38%, a negligible difference. See Appendix D (page
12, “2014 Summer Drop Rates - Comparison of Online and Face-to-Face Courses”).
Other Activities
1. CAPS heard and approved the Psychology Department’s summer session start date appeal.
2. CAPS heard and voted on 22 student appeals.
Semester
Fall 2014
Spring 2015
Type of Appeal
Ineligibility
Appeal of repeat course
taken at another
institution
Waiver of graduation
requirement of 40 credits
required at 300/400 level
Waiver of time limit to
process grade changes
Waiver of requirement
that last 24 credits
applied to a degree must
be earned in residence
Number of Appeals
4
1
Number Approved
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Ineligibility
Waiver of time limit to
process grade changes
13
1
8
1
4
Recommendations
For 2014-2015, one charge for the committee was to “consider whether there should be restrictions on the
enrollment of incoming freshmen in online courses.” Based on our research and discussion, CAPS:
(1) supports Online Education’s development of an online learning success module, as well as requiring all
students to complete this module before enrolling in an online class.
(2) recommends that the university (e.g., CAPS or another committee) continue to monitor trends in
freshman online enrollment and performance.
On behalf of the committee, I would like to specifically thank the following consultants and personnel for
their excellent information and support they provided throughout the year: Chris Bakkum, Cheryl Brye, Carla
Burkhardt, Katherine Elgin, Guy Hurling, Sandy Keller, Brad Seebach, Shari Schoohs, Scott Stine, Peter
Stovall, Cynthia Taylor, Becky Vianden, Jan von Ruden, Tim Walls, and Sibbie Weathers. I would also like
to thank the committee members for their involvement in making this a productive year for the committee.
Please let me know if you have any questions concerning this report.
Respectfully submitted,
Tony Docan-Morgan
Department of Communication Studies
5
APPENDIX A
Report on Mass Exam Times
Approved by Faculty Senate April 2, 2015
Background and Statement of Purpose
The Committee on Academic Policies and Standards (CAPS) was informed that mass final exam time requests
from instructors/departments have increased and that there is currently not a formalized method of reviewing
and granting mass final exam time requests. CAPS was charged with investigating this issue and to work with
Records and Registration to develop a formalized method of reviewing existing mass final exam needs and
granting new mass final exam time requests. CAPS seeks Faculty Senate acceptance of this report and
approval of the procedural recommendations.
Present Situation at UW-L
 Out of 29 final exam slots, 7 are used for mass
final exams. See schedule and notes here.
 The 6 departments currently using mass final
exams were asked why they need/use mass
exams. Responses indicated the need to:
- reduce cheating (e.g., eliminates risk of
questions getting out to students in other
sections)
- increase efficiency (e.g., uploading
multiple sets of data for exam scores on
multiple days or times becomes more time
consuming and increases the chance of
error)
 Currently, the Provost fields new instructor/department requests for mass final exam slots and there is no
formalized method of reviewing and granting mass final exam time requests.
Mass Final Exams at Other UW Institutions
CAPS asked registrars at the other 11 4-year UW institutions about if/how they use mass exam times, who
processes/grants mass exam requests, and criteria used when granting mass exam times. See the Appendix A
for registrars’ responses. CAPS noted the following themes in these responses:
• 4 out of 10 UW institutions report using mass final exams on a consistent and substantial basis.
• Mass final exam requests are solicited either by an individual department or the records/registration
office. In some instances, deans serve as an intermediary.
• Provosts and faculty committees were not mentioned as being involved in the process of granting mass
final exam requests.
• Criteria for granting mass exam time slots include number of students enrolled in courses, minimizing
time conflicts in students’ schedules, and effects on student learning/assessment.
CAPS also noted other models for final exams used in the UW system, but does not recommend adopting any
of these at this time.
•
•
•
•
Combine all evening finals with mass exam finals (Platteville)
Have 6 or 7 days of finals (Milwaukee and Madison, respectively; Madison also uses Sundays)
Designate mass exams to early morning (7:30 a.m.) or late night slots (8:00 p.m.) (Milwaukee)
Have all finals on the last day of classes during week 14 (Oshkosh)
6
Recommendations
1. Create two new mass final exam slots:
a. Currently, there is a mass exam slot for ACC 222 and an additional slot that combines ACC 221 and
PHY 203/204. The Department of Accountancy has agreed to combine ACC 221 and ACC 222
sections into one slot (221 is a prerequisite for 222). PHY 203/204 take their mass exams with the
ACC 221/222 sections, as there are very rarely students who have ACC 221/222 and PHY 203/204.
Making this change will free up one slot for mass final exams.
b. Currently, the last final exam time slot is not being used (i.e., 7:00-9:00 PM on December 17 for Fall
2014; 7:00-9:00 PM on May 15 for Spring 2015). CAPS recommends opening this slot for mass
exams and not rotating it, as all of the other slots are rotated. Opening this slot for a mass exam helps
satisfy instructor need for additional mass exam times and may require that instructors carefully
consider the necessity of having a mass exam, since it would be at the end of the final exam period.
2. Institute a formalized method of granting new mass final exam requests. CAPS provided a report to the
Deans’ Council on February 9, 2015 about the above-mentioned items. Deans’ Council recommended that
new requests for mass final exam slots go to the Records and Registration Office, who will consult with
deans’ offices and the Provost, as needed. Deans’ Council indicated that the number of students affected
should be the primary criterion for awarding mass exam slots and that CAPS should determine an enrollment
number that is reasonable for granting mass final exam requests. CAPS recommends the following criteria be
considered when reviewing and granting these requests:
a. Number of students per mass exam slot: CAPS analyzed data provided by Records and Registration
for 2014-2015. As a point of reference, the number of students taking final exams for each mass final
exam slot includes 263 (CS/CT classes), 275 (SPA classes), 295 (ACC 222), 323 (ACC 221), 720
(HPR 105), 910 (MTH 145), and 1,162 (MTH classes), therefore averaging 586 students.
Departments making requests for mass exams should be asked, “What is the total number of students
affected or how many students will be taking an exam at this time?”
b. Additional criteria to consider and information to solicit from departments making mass final
exam requests:
i. Number of courses per mass exam slot: How many and which courses would share this slot?
Departments should provide a rationale for combining these courses into one slot. Courses with
a stronger rationale for being combined into one mass exam time may be more likely to be
granted a mass exam time.
ii. Sections per course: How many total sections per course would share this slot (even if taught
by multiple instructors)?
iii. Sections per instructor: How many sections of the same course are taught by a single
instructor (regardless of amount of students)?
iv. Examination procedure: Do all sections use the same exam questions (e.g., standardized
questions)? Courses that use the same exam questions may be more likely to be granted a mass
exam time.
v. Other reasons: What other reasons or motivations exist for having a mass exam?
3. Institute a regular review of existing mass exam time slots. Deans’ Council and CAPS recommends
instituting a review of existing mass exam time slots every three years. Departments with existing mass exam
time slots will be asked to indicate in a short survey the rationale for their existing mass exam time slot and
to address the above mentioned criteria. Records and Registration will initiate the survey, consult with CAPS
about results and potential changes to the mass exam schedule, and consult with and receive approval for
changes for mass final exam slots from deans’ offices and the Provost.
7
Mass Exams at UW Institutions
University
Contact
Whitewater
Oshkosh
No response (3 attempts)
Lisa Danielson,
Registrar,
danielsn@uwosh.edu
Superior
Green Bay
Stevens
Point
River Falls
Stout
Milwaukee
Schedule
Policy
Jeff Kirschling,
Registrar,
jkirschl@uwsup
er.edu
Cris Nelson,
Office of the
Registrar,
nelsonc@uwgb.
edu
Dan Kellogg,
Registrar; Joyce
Roth schedules
the exams,
jroth@uwsp.edu
Daniel Yacht,
Registrar,
daniel.vandeyac
ht@uwrf.edu
Scott Correll,
Registration and
Records,
corrells@uwsto
ut.edu
Seth Zlotocha,
Registrar,
zlotocha@uwm.
edu
Details about finals
and mass exams
How does your institution grant mass final exam time slots? What criteria are used to award
slots? Who processes requests for mass final exam slots? What advice or suggestions do you
have for our institution regarding our mass final exam conundrum?
No mass exams.
Note: Finals given on the last
day that a student's class
meets in week 14.
No common exams here
at Superior.
None of our classes have
requested mass final
exams.
We only have one
department that uses a
mass final exam: Math
90, 100 and 355.
[When I worked at UW-EC], departments request common exams for courses. I identified them
with a course attribute and Tami built a nice warehouse query which helped me determine students
who were in all of the common courses and I used that information to schedule the common exams
out into the 6-7 blocks avoiding as much conflicts as possible.
Obviously you probably won’t be able to accommodate all requests so if we were faced with the
decision we would probably let the Deans decide. Perhaps they would select by total number of
students involved in each of the times or strictly by lottery. In our case, the number of students
involved would be a huge factor just because of our room sizes.
I don’t really know how/when this process for Math was approved. My guess is that it was by
retired registrar Dave Eckholm. My only thought is to have more than one group of classes meet at
the same final exam time. The question then is whether or not it would be likely that a student
would be in both groups of classes.
One mass exam time slot We only have mass exams for the following course English 020, 101, 100, 200, 201
in 4 days of finals
Very few mass exam
requests; just a few
courses.
Notes: 5 days of final
exams; 5 slots for mass
exams
Many mass exams start
at 7:30 AM or 8:00 PM.
Note: 6 days of finals;
7th day for emergency
Requests are processed in our registration and records office by our course scheduler (who also
schedules academic space). My only initial thought is that I cannot imagine the amount of time
conflicts for students should this action be the prevailing thought. What if a student has five
courses and all five subjects want to offer a mass final at the same time block?
We don't have a formal process for establishing combined finals, the department would just
indicate to our office that a combined final is desired, and we would look at the schedule to
determine a time that doesn't conflict -- or isn't likely to conflict -- with other existing exam times.
Combined finals could receive the early and late hour slots.
8
Madison
Schedule
Eau Claire
Schedule
and Policy
Platteville
Schedule
Parkside
Kate Bartlett,
Office of
Registrar,
kebartlett@em.
wisc.edu
Josh Lind,
Associate
Registrar,
lindjh@uwec.ed
u
David
Kieckhafer
Lori Turner,
Assistant
Registrar,
turnerl@uwp.ed
u
make-ups. No Sunday
finals.
38 slots; 12 are mass
exams.
Note: 7 days of finals,
including Sunday
28 slots for finals; 7 of
these slots are for mass
exams.
Note: 5 days of finals;
no exams on Sunday;
similar to UW-L
28 slots for finals; 8/28
of the slots are for mass
exams only; 4/28 of the
slots are for evening
classes and mass exams.
Note: 5 days of finals;
no Sunday exams
4 days of finals;
however, the Saturday
prior to these 4 days,
there are common exams
with 2 times indicated
for different levels of
math. We also have a
common time for
Spanish classes. They
get the late Wednesday
time slot where very few
exams are scheduled.
Each semester, Registrar sends memo to deans who contact department chairs. The memo lists the
courses they’ve had a group exams for the last two semesters. Deans/chairs are asked to indicate
need to for group exams. Criteria for group exams: must have more than one lecture session, same
exam for all students, all students must take the exam at the same time. Coded in the catalog that
they take a group exam.
Records/Registrar processes requests. Registrar asks departments to identify which courses they'd
like to have us include in the common final exam blocks. Then I try to fit the classes into the
blocks so as to minimize student conflicts. …we don't really say "no" to requests. Our goal is to
facilitate the pedagogical/assessment process, not stand in the way of it.
The biggest users of common exams [at UW-EC] are mathematics, languages, and
accounting. …The biggest frustration with the setup, from my perspective, is the amount of time
and energy it takes.
Currently it is a department request. Requests for group exams seem to be increasing and we are
running out of the ability to schedule them (both time and space). We are also hearing from more
students each term who have two group exams at the same time. We may need to explore in
upcoming terms how approval is granted (i.e. create some criteria).
A previous institution I worked at had this same conundrum. The Dean of the college had to
approve any common exam times. There had to be a good reason for the common exam time and
not to reduce the faculty time for giving exams. The main reason was that when the students took
tests based on their class times and didn’t use a common exam time, it was determined that there
was a significant grade curve in that the first group of students tested scored lower than students
tested later. That warranted being assigned a common exam time. In addition, some departments
had standardized tests and they weren’t able to provide different or alternative exams.
9
APPENDIX B
Handout Distributed by Lynn Wieland on October 24, 2014
First Year Students Enrolling in Online Courses
Special Charge: Consider whether there should be restrictions on the enrollment of incoming freshmen in online courses.
Audience: incoming freshmen taking online courses in the summer prior to fall start
Motivations to register:
 Athletes wishing to take a lighter course load for fall
 Students plan to take courses every summer to finish in 4 years; savings, students look for this opportunity as they
choose a campus
 Students wish to stay at home because of family, family jobs (some being family-owned businesses or well-established
jobs from high school, friend connections, or cost of housing and food in combination of one of the other motivations)
 Students want to get acclimated to D2L and/or want something to do during the summer
Motivations that do not lend for good student success:
 Parent/guardian motivation not student motivation
 Student wanting to enroll that has demanding summer job(s) and/or a very active social life
 Student wishing to register for 6 credits of courses to activate the financial aid but the student motivation does not
match the course workload
Motivations for registering for more than one course during the summer
 Financial aid
 Experience in high school taking online courses
 Organized and focused
 Social circle values education
 Example of homeschooler in 2012
 No summer job or manageable work schedule
Faculty
 Offer campus online courses specifically geared for above audience, but stronger assistance from CEE
 Faculty ENG 110 (online) and CST 110 (f2f); interest and expertise working with this age group, no hand holding;
acute awareness of inexperience with D2L, more anxiety, new to campus
 Downside; all freshmen, Upside; all freshmen
Competition
 If we don’t provide for our students, they will seek courses outside our campus; quality control issues
 Provide our students with what they need from UWL
 Reality; summer courses are not a good fit for some students, online or f2f
Solutions
 Module for EVERY student to participate in before enrolling in first online UWL course; “How to be a successful
online student”
 Online orientation to campus designed by First Year Experience Coordinator and team
 Advising for students/parents/guardians
 Bigger presence on the web to include clear understanding of tuition, seg fees, reciprocity forms, registration and
withdrawal process
 Provide our regional guidance counselors with more specific information on online courses
Mode
Online
Face-to-Face
Total
Summer 2012 (2131)
5
87
92
Summer 2013 (2141)
16
105
121
Summer 2014 (2151)
55
68
123
10
APPENDIX C
Academic Probation Registration Restriction Policy
Approved by Faculty Senate February 26, 2015
Proposed policy: Students who are on probation will have an academic probation registration restriction
(negative service indicator) placed on their student record. Students must meet with their academic advisor of
their primary major before registering for a new semester in order to remove this restriction.
Background and rationale: During the 2013-2014 academic school year, CAPS members and consultants
(e.g., assistants to the deans, college advisors) heard 23 student appeals of academic ineligibility. During these
appeals, many students indicated having never met their faculty advisor. Further, these students reported not
knowing who their faculty advisor is, how to find their faculty advisor, and where to find student success
resources (i.e., advising, tutoring, Disability Resource Services). Although many departments and programs
place advising holds on all advisees’ records, requiring a face-to-face meeting with the faculty member and
advisee, many do not. CAPS members and consultants believe that students on probation would benefit from a
required meeting with their faculty advisor. This policy would complement existing advising and retention
resources such as Eagle Alert and the new advising website, as well as fill an advising gap for probationary
students. On December 5, 2014, CAPS voted 8-0-0 in favor of the aforementioned policy.
Functionality: If this policy is approved, the Records and
Registration Office would put a negative service indicator,
labeled “Probation Hold” on probationary students’
WINGS accounts. This label would be located under the
“Holds” box within the WINGS Advisee Student Center.
This registration restriction would be placed on
probationary students’ records after the “drop/add/change
of schedule” period, which falls on the sixth day of
instruction each semester. Probationary students would
have between the end of the drop/add/change of schedule
period and their enrollment appointment to meet with their
academic advisor to have the registration restriction
removed. After meeting with the student, the advisor
would remove the registration restriction in WINGS. Note that the Academic Advising Center already institutes
this policy for assigned undeclared students, and supports this policy proposal.
Communication plan: If this policy is approved, the Records and Registration Office will email probationary
students and their advisors once the negative service indicator has been placed on their account (i.e., at the end
of the “drop/add/change of schedule” period), indicating that the student must meet with their faculty advisor
before registering for a new semester in order to remove this restriction. This email will also include
information about finding student success resources. Further, CAPS and Tim Tritch are in continued talks about
the possibility of creating an automatic alert in the Eagle Alert system when a student goes on probation.
11
APPENDIX D: 2014 Summer Drop Rates - Comparison of Online and Face-to-Face Courses
= data provided by Office of Institutional Research
** = data collected via WINGS
*
Course*
Online?**
Enrollments of
20+ and assign letter grades
SOC 323-1 section
ESS 281-1 section
MTH 150-1 section
ESS 323-1 section
ERS 100-3 sections
HIS 101-2 sections
BIO 103-2 sections
SOC 110-2 sections
CST 333-1 section
PSY 241-1 section
PSY 318-1 section
ACC 222-2 sections
ECO 110-2 sections
BUS 205-1 section
PSY 305-1 section
PSY 370-1 section
THA 110-3 sections
BIO 313-3 sections
POL 101-2 sections
MTH 175-1 section
NUT 200-1 section
ENG 110-4 sections
ECO 120-2 sections
HP 250-1 section
MTH 145-4 sections
HPR 105-6 sections
PSY 212-2 sections
BIO 312-4 sections
PSY 100-2 sections
POL 201-1 section
IS 220-2 sections
RTH 404-2 sections
SPA 305-1 section
CHM 103-4 sections
ART 102-3 sections
FIN 207-1 section
CST 110-2 sections
MGT 308-1 section
ECO 320-1 section
PSY 334-1 section
PSY 321-1 section
ACC 327-1 section
ANT 266-1 section
POL 102-1 section
PSY 335-1 section
MKT 309-1 section
ENG 203-1 section
CHM 301-3 sections
PHY 103-3 sections
PSY 204-2 sections
ACC 221-2 sections
Averages 
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
2 sections online; 1 in
class
No
1 section online; 1 in
class
No
Yes
3 sections online; 1 in
class
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Capacity per
Section**
Enrollment when
course started*
25
24
33
30
25
30
24
25
25
25
25
20
25
30
25
25
30
48
25
30
30
30
25
30
35
50
25
72
25
20
24
20
20
48
35
27
23
32
25
25
25
30
25
30
25
27
30
48
48
25
30
21
24
35
29
69
61
21
44
23
23
23
48
48
24
24
24
67
42
42
28
31
81
49
34
124
195
55
74
58
20
41
21
21
43
109
23
24
24
25
25
26
27
27
27
28
30
31
39
41
44
46
Dropped*
3
3
4
3
7
6
2
4
2
2
2
4
4
2
2
2
5
3
3
2
2
5
3
2
7
11
3
4
3
1
2
1
1
2
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Drop
Rate*
14.30%
12.50%
11.40%
10.30%
10.10%
9.80%
9.50%
9.10%
8.70%
8.70%
8.70%
8.30%
8.30%
8.30%
8.30%
8.30%
7.50%
7.10%
7.10%
7.10%
6.50%
6.20%
6.10%
5.90%
5.60%
5.60%
5.50%
5.40%
5.20%
5.00%
4.90%
4.80%
4.80%
4.70%
4.60%
4.30%
4.20%
4.20%
4.00%
4.00%
3.80%
3.70%
3.70%
3.70%
3.60%
3.30%
3.20%
2.60%
2.40%
2.30%
2.20%
6.26%
Drop rate if
online*
Drop rate if
face-to-face*
14.30%
12.50%
11.40%
10.30%
10.10%
9.80%
9.50%
9.10%
8.70%
8.70%
8.70%
8.30%
8.30%
8.30%
8.30%
8.30%
7.10%
7.10%
6.50%
6.10%
5.90%
5.60%
5.60%
5.50%
5.40%
5.20%
5.00%
4.90%
4.80%
4.80%
4.70%
4.60%
4.30%
4.20%
4.20%
4.00%
4.00%
3.80%
3.70%
3.70%
3.70%
3.60%
3.30%
3.20%
2.60%
2.40%
2.30%
2.20%
6.38%
5.73%
12